FT MEfiDE 

HD 9825 
. P5 
1911 
I Copy 2 

I FT MEADE 
GenCol1 









4 








I 






62 d Congress \ 
1st Session / 


SENATE 


/ Document 
\ No. 31 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 

INDUSTRY 

* 


MESSAGE FROM THE 
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING A 

REPORT BY THE TARIFF BOARD 
RELATIVE TO PULP AND NEWS¬ 
PRINT PAPER INDUSTRY :: :: 



May 17, 1911.—Read; referred to the Committee on Finance 

and ordered to be printed 


WASHINGTON 

GOVERNMENT PRINTING OFFICE 
1911 







































62d Congress \ 
1st Session J 


SENATE 


U.S, T, 




la o- 


/ Document 
t No. 31 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 

INDUSTRY 

V 3 2L 


MESSAGE FROM THE 
PRESIDENT OF THE UNITED STATES 

TRANSMITTING A 

REPORT BY THE TARIFF BOARD 
RELATIVE TO PULP AND NEWS¬ 
PRINT PAPER INDUSTRY :: :: 



May 17, 1911.— Read; referred to the Committee on Finance 

and ordered to be printed 


WASHINGTON 

1911 










W ^ %1 

r\ 


s 

V 




LETTER OF TRANSMITTAL. 


To the Senate: 


I have the honor to transmit herewith a report on the pulp and news¬ 
print paper industry by the Tariff Board. In response to a resolution 
of the Senate dated February 23, 1911, I forwarded a report by the 
Tariff Board answering as far as practicable the inquiries of that reso¬ 
lution. That report contained a preliminary report on the pulp and 
news-print paper industry. 

As will be seen from the letter of transmittal, the present report is 
not a supplement to the preliminary report, but is a complete unit in 
itself. 


Wm. H. Taft. 


The White House, May 17 , 1911. 


S. Doc 31, 62-1 


1 


1 






















LETTER OF SUBMITTAL. 


Office of the Taeiff Boaed, 

Teeasury Building, 

Washington , Ma g 15, 1911. 

The President: 

I have the honor to present herewith a report of the Tariff Board 
on the pulp and news-print paper industry. 

According to your instructions, we submitted to you on February 
28, 1911, a preliminary report on this subject, in response to a reso¬ 
lution of the Senate dated February 23, 1911. 

The board submits the present report not as a supplement to the 
preliminary report, but as a complete unit in itself. Certain differ¬ 
ences between the earlier report and this completed report are the 
result of the inclusion of mills from which we had not received returns 
at that time. Other differences are due to a more detailed analvsis of 
the schedules. 

In addition to the material in the preliminary report we submit 
figures as to pulp-wood costs, intermediate profits, equipment and 
efficiency, prices, investment, and the relation of output to profit. 

The data regarding wages and hours of employment in this country 
and Canada have now been made complete on the basis of the total 
production included by our investigation, which is practically 80 per 
cent of the output of news-print paper in the United States and about 
the same percentage of the output in Canada. 

The significance of the data and the meaning of any differences 
between the figures of the preliminary report and this report are fully 
considered in the body of the report. 

Respectfullv submitted. 

H. C. E mery, Chairman. 

3 

































• . 







































. . * 
































t 











T . -. . : . > 

\ ,. • r,, * 





- 






. . 








.. ' 
























TABLE OF CONTENTS. 


Pace. 

Part I. Scope of investigation. 7 

II. Production of pulp and paper in the United States. 20 

III. Cost of production in the United States: 

(a) Explanatory statement. 24 

(b) Tables and comment. 26 

IV. Canadian investigation: Cost of production of pulp and paper. 34 

V. Comparison of costs in the United States and Canada. 39 

VI. Intermediate profits and cost of wood. 42 

VII. Pounds of material per ton of news-print paper. 48 

VIII. Efficiency of equipment in paper mills in the United States and 

Canada. 52 

IX. Prices of news-print paper. 57 

X. Investment and depreciation. 70 

XI. Variations in costs of production over a period of years. 77 

XII. Amount, value, and sources of wood pulp imports into the United 

States. 85 

XIII. Wages and hours of labor in the United States and Canada: 

(a) Classification, etc. 90 

( b) Rates of wages and hours of employment. 102 


S 


5 


















































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Part I. 

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION. 

The data on pulp and paper included in the following tables were 
secured from 53 ground-wood mills, 25 sulphite mills, and 38 news¬ 
print mills, making a total of 116 mills and representing 940,478 tons 
of news-print paper or 80 per cent of the news-print paper production 
of the United States. The data for Canada were taken from 13 
ground-wood mills, 5 sulphite mills, and 7 news-print paper plants. 
Reports were secured covering 78.2 per cent of the news-print paper, 
60.2 per cent of the ground-wood, and 55.7 per cent of the sulphite 
pulp capacity in Canada. This report does not deal with bleached 
sulphite pulp, sulphite made by the Mitscherlich process, sulphate, 
nor soda pulps. 

All of these figures, including those from Canada, have been secured 
directly by our representatives from the books of the different com¬ 
panies. We prepared exact schedules including all essential items of 
equipment, cost, and wages; and for each of the companies included 
in the tables we have the original schedules covering all items in 
detail. Copies of the schedules used are herewith submitted, so that 
the true nature of the investigation may be understood. 

[T. B.—1301. Confidential. Identification No. ...] 

The Tariff Board. 

PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 

Schedule 1 . —General information. 

1. ' Name of firm or corporation. 

2. Address. 


3. Plants owned or operated, or subsidiary concerns controlled: 


Name. 

Location. 







/ 



4 . Articles manufactured (give list of articles manufactured): 


Names of articles. 

Unit. 

Quantity. 

Value. 





. 













We, the undersigned, certify that the figures and data given on the accompanying sheets (marked sched¬ 
ules 1, 2a, 2b, 2c, 3a, 3b, 4, 5, and 6) are taken from the books of accounting of the above-named firm, and 
are accurate and correct to the best of our knowledge and belief. 


(Official position with the company or firm.) 


Accountant or Chief Bookkeeper. 

7 


































8 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


[T. B.—1302. Confidential. Identification No....] 

The Tariff Board. 

PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 

Schedule 2a.— Equipment and operation of ground-pulp mills . 

Operations carried on during the year ended., 191... 

1. Name of plant. 

2. Location. 

3. Date of erection of plant.; rebuilt. 

4. Power: 

a. Water—Available horsepower,.; actually used—highest.; lowest, 

b. Steam—Available horsepower,. 

Boilers—Type.; number.; nominal horsepower .. 

5. Barkers: 


Number. 

Type. 

Make. 

Capacity 
in cords, 

24 hours. 


















6. Grinders: 


Number. 

Number 

of 

pockets. 

Type. 

Make. 

Year 

built. 

Capacity 
in tons, 

24 hours. 

0 






















» 




7. Separators: 


Number. 

Type. 

Make. 



\ 











8. Wet machines: 


Number. 

Type. 

Make. 

Year built. 

Capacity 
in tons, 

24 hours. 






















9. Total labor pay roll for year, including foremen, $. 

10. Number of full days (24 hours) plant was in operation during the year 













































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


9 


11. Number of employees required to operate plant fully (one shift) 

12. Number of shifts per day. 


13. Length of each shift: Daily. Number of hours 

per week. 

From.to. 

From... to. 

From.to. 


14. Total one-man hours of labor in plant during the year. 

15. Output per man per hour. 

(Not to be filled in.) 

Remarks: . 


Data secured.,191.. 


Representative. 


Agent. 


[T. B. —1303. Confidential. Identification No. ...] 

The Tariff Board. 

PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 

Schedule 2b .—Equipment and operation of chemical pulp mills. 

Operations carried on during the year ended., 191.. 

1. Name of plant.. 

2. Location. 

3. Date of erection of plant.; rebuilt. 

4. Chemical pulp: 

(Strike out those not used.) 

Soda, tons produced.. 

Sulphite, tons produced. 

Sulphate, tons produced... 

5. Process used. 

6. Power: 

a. Water: Available horsepower,.; actually used—highest,.; lowest, 

b. Steam: Available horsepower. 

Boilers—Type.; number.; nominal horsepower. 

7. Barkers: * 


N umber. 

Type. 

Make. 

Capacity 
in cords, 24 
hours. 


















8. Chippers: 


Number. 


Type. 


Make. 


Year 

built. 


Capacity 
in cords/24 
hours. 
































































10 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


9. Burners: 


10. Gas absorbers: 



Number. 

Total sulphur 
burned in 24 
hours (pounds). 

i 

Number. 

Type. 

Sulphur 


Towers.... 



Pyrites 


Tanks. 









11. Digesters: 


Number. 

Type. 

Tons 
capacity 
per 24 
hours. 

Hours 
required 
for one 
charge. 


















12. Washing tanks: 



Number. 

Type. 

Centrifugal. 



Evaporators. 










13. Total labor pay roll for year, including foremen. $. 

14. Number of full days (24 hours) plant was in operation during the year.. 

15. Number of employees required to operate plant fully (one shift). 

16. Number of shifts per day... 

17. Length of each shift: 

Daily. Number of hours per week. 


From.to. 

From.to. 

From.to. 

4 


18. Total one-man hours of labor in plant during the year. 

19. Output per man per hour. 

(Not to be filled in.) 


Remarks 


Representative. 

Data secured.,191 . 

Agent. 


[T. B.—1304. Confidential. Identification No. ...] 

The Tariff Board. 

PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 

Schedule 2c. —Equipment and operation of paper plant. 
Operations carried on during the year ended., 191... 

1. Name of plant. 

2. Location. 






































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


11 


3. Date of erection of plant.; rebuilt. Machinery.; rebuilt 

4. Paper produced: 


Kinds and grades. 

Quantity. 

Value. 











-1 



5. Power: 

a. Water—Available horsepower,.; actually used—highest,.; lowest, 

b. Steam—Available horsepower,. 

Boilers—Type.; number.; nominal horsepower 

6. Beaters, mixers, Hollands, and Jordan engines: 




Number. 

Type. 

Make. 

Year 

installed. 

Capacity 
in tons, 

24 hours. 






















7. Paper machines: 

(Fourdrinier, cylinder machine, and supercalenders, etc., to be designated under “Type,” and all inquiries 

applicable answered for each machine.) 


Number. 

Type. 

Make. 

Year of 
installa¬ 
tion. 

Size. 

Width of 
roll 

Speed in 
feet per 
minute. 

Capacity 
in tons, 
24 hours. 


































8. Total labor pay roll for the year, including foremen. $ . 

9. Number of full days (24 hours) plant was in operation during the year. 

10. Number of employees required to operate plant fully (one shift). 

11. Number of shifts per day. 

12. Length of each shift: Daily. Hoars per week. 

From. to.. 

From. to. 

From. to... 

13. Total one-man hours of labor in plant during the year. 

14. Output per man per hour. 

(Not to be filled in.) 


Remarks: 


Representative. 


7 


191 . 


Data secured 


Agent. 





















































































12 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


[T. B—1305. Confidential. Identification No. ...] 
The Tariff Board. 


PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 

Schedule 3a.— Cost of manufacture. 

Cost of manufacture of.pulp for the year ended., 191.. 

1. Materials used: 

Note. —Enumerate each item, including only such as are used directly on the product, whether pur¬ 
chased or made by this concern, but not including miscellaneous supplies; raw materials purchased should 
be stated at the cost set down at the works; materials manufactured by this concern should be stated at 
the actual cost. 


A. 

Items. 

B. 

Quantity 

used. 


C. 

Range of cost price 
per unit. 
(Dollars.) 

D. 

Total cost 
value. 
(Dollars.) 

E. 

Average 
cost per 
unit of 
material 
D-hB. 

F. 

Average 
cost per 
unit of 
finished 
product 
D-f-6. 

G. 

Quantity 
of mate¬ 
rial per 
ton of 
product. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Wood. 






(Not to be filloc 

f 

I in.) 

Sulphur. 









Pyrites. 









Limestone. 









Lime. 









Soda. 


















Total materials... 

















2. Labor. 

(Manufacturing labor 
only, including fore¬ 
men.) 









Prime cost. 









(Not to be filled 
in.) 









































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


13 


Schedule 3a..— Cost of manufacture —Continued. 



Total cost. 

(Dollars.) 

Average cost per ton. 

3. Works expense: 

a. Supplies— 

1. Pulp stones. 


(Not to be filled in.) 

2. Felts— 

Wool. 



Canvas. 



3. Wires. 



4. Screen plates. 



5. Belting. 



6. Lubricants. 



7. Fuel- 

Coal. 



Wood. 






Total supplies. 





6. Waterpower. 



c. Repairs and maintenance— 

Materials. 



Labor. 



d. Administration expense charge¬ 
able to manufacture. 



e. Miscellaneous operating ex¬ 
penses . 



f. Accident insurance, if any. 



g. Hauling and stable. 





- 

Total works expense (a to g). 











































14 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Schedule 3a.— Cost of manufacture— Continued. 


.. .- - - • - . ... 

Total cost 
(dollars). 

Average 
cost per 
ton. — 

4. Fixed charges: 

a. Depreciation — 

Give depreciation chargeable to the part of the plant employed in 
the manufacture of above product, viz- 

1. Depreciation of the buildings— 

Valuation at, cost,, 8 


(Not to be 
filled in.) 

Annual denreeiatinn rate. _ neroent . 


» 

2. Depreciation and obsoletion of machinery and equipment- 

valuation at cost, $. 



Annual depreciation rate . percent . 



Total depreciation. 



b. Fire insurance. 



c. Taxes . 



(Excluding Federal corporation tax.) 



Total fixed charges. 



5. Total cost in bulk at the works. 







6 Pulp produced (air dry): 

Total tons. 

Tons per working day of 24 hours.'. 



Dollars. 

Average 
cost per 
unit of 
product. 

7. Selling expenses (if pulp is sold to outside mills): 

(Amount chargeable to this product for salaries of officers, clerks, etc., on 
account of selling department, and other items in this connection.) 


(Not to be 
filled in.) 







Total selling expenses. 







8. Gross sales: 

Tons. 

Amount...j 

Kinds of wood used. 

Remarks.i. 


Data secured.191.. 


Representative. 


Agent. 























































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


15 


[T. B.—1306. Confidential. Identification No_] 

The Tariff Board. 


PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 


Schedule 3b.— Cost of manufacture. 

Cost of manufacture of.paper for the year ended.191.. 

(Attach sample.) 

J. Materials used: 

Note. —Enumerate each item, including only such as are used directly on the product, whether pur¬ 
chased or made by this concern, but not including miscellaneous supplies; raw materials purchased 
should be stated at the cost set down at the works; materials manufactured by this concern should be 
stated at the actual cost. 


t 

A 

Items. 

B 

Quan¬ 

tity 

used. 


C 

Range of cost 
price per unit. 
(Dollars.) 

D 

Total 

cost 

value. 

(Dollars.) 

E 

Average 
cost per 
unit of 
material. 
D-4-B. 

F 

Average 
cost per 
unit of 
finished 
product. 
D-t-6. 

G 

Quantity 
of mate¬ 
rial per 
ton of 
product. 

Lowest. 

High¬ 

est. 

Ground wood. 






(Not 

to be fillec 

1 in.) 

Sulphite. 




• ■ 





Ground-wood screenings. 









Sulphite screenings. 









Soda and sulphite pulp. 









Waste paper (purchased). 









Cotton waste. 









Bagging. 









Fillers. 


















Alum. 







.. - .. 


Bleach and chemicals. 


















Color. 









Sizing. 









Total materials. 

















2. Labor. 









(Manufacturing labor only, in¬ 
cluding foremen.) 

Prime cost. 






• 











(Not to be filled in.) 




























































16 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Schedule 3b.— Cost of manufacture— Continued. 


Total cost 
(dollars). 


Average 
cost per 
ton. 


3. Works expense: * 

a. Supplies— 

1. Felts— 
Wool 


(Not to be 
filled in.) 


Canvas 

2. Wires_ 


3. Screen plates. 

4. Belting. 

5. Lubricants. 

6. Finishing materials 

7. Fuel- 

Coal. 

Wood.. 


Total supplies. 

6. Waterpower. 

c. Repairs and maintenance— 

Materials. 

Labor. 

d. Administration expense chargeable to manufacture 

e. Miscellaneous operating expenses. 

/. Accident insurance, if any. 

g. Hauling and stable. 


Total works expense (a to g) . 

4. Fixed charges: 

a. Depreciation- 

Give depreciation chargeable to the part of the plant employed in 
the manufacture of above product, viz— 

1. Depreciation of the buildings— 

Valuation at cost, $ . 

Annual depreciation rate.percent. 

2. Depreciation of machinery and equipment— 

0 

Valuation at cost, $.. 

Annual depreciation rate.per cent.. 

Total depreciation. 

b. Fire insurance. 

c. Taxes. 

(Excluding Federal corporation tax.) 


Total fixed charges 


5. Total cost in bulk at the works 



























































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


17 


6. Paper produced: 

Quality (weight per ream of sheets of given size) 

Quantity (tons). 

Tons per working day of 24 hours. 



Dollars. 

Average 
cost per 
unit of 
product. 

7. Selling expenses: 

(Amount chargeable to this product for salaries of officers, clerks, etc., on 
account of selling department, and other items in this connection.) 


(Not to be 
filled in.) 







Total selling expenses. 







8. Gross sales: 

Tons. 

Amount. $ 

Remarks. 


Data secured 


191 . 


Representative. 


Field Agent. 


[T. B.—2. Identification No. ...] 

The Tariff Board. 

Schedule 4. — Wages: Time workers. 

General industry... 

Specific product.; occupation. 

Working hours: Day shift.a. m. to.p. m.,.minutes for lunch. 

Night shift.p. m. to.a. m.,.minutes for lunch. 

Pay roll for. 19.. 


Number of 
employees. 

Sex. 

Days per week. 

Hours. 

... 

Rate of pay 

per. 

of.hours. 

Full day. 









$. 




















S. Doc. 31, 62-1 


2 

































































18 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


[T. B.—3. Identification No. ...] 

The Tariff Board. 

Schedule 5.— Wages: Pieceworkers. 

General industry.; Specific product. 

Occupation. 

Working hours: Day shift.a. m. to.p. m.,.minutes for lunch. 

Night shift.p. m. to.a. m.,.minutes for lunch. 

Payroll for.19.. 


Number of 
employees. 

Sex. 

Full time. 

Actual time made and earnings 

in. 

Days per 
week. 

Hours. 

Full day. 


Hours 

worked. 

Earnings. 




















. 










T. B.—4. The Tariff Board. Identification No... 

Schedule 6. 

1. What is your name?. 

2. In what country were you born?. 

3. How many years have you been in the United States?. 

4. Sex (male or female)?. 

5. Age?. 

6. Occupation (what work do you do)?. 

7. How much do you earn per day?. 

8. How many days do you work per week?. 


9. Number of hours per day?. Per night? 

10. Do you work day shift?. 

Night shift?. Alternate? 


[T. B.—1307. Confidential. Identification No. 

The Tariff Board. 

PAPER AND PULP INDUSTRY. 

Schedule 7 .—Prices. 

Price of . paper. Fiscal year ending . ,191.. 



B 


C 


D 


Quantity 
of paper 
contracted 
for. 


E 


Date of signing 
contract. 


Period covered by 
contract. 


Purchaser and city to which de¬ 
livered. 


Price per 
100 pounds 
delivered. 






























































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


19 


Schedule 7— Prices— Continued. 


F 

Freight 
and cartage 
rate per 100 
pounds. 

G 

Commis¬ 

sion. 

H 

Net price 
per 100 
pounds at 
mill. 

K 

Terms of sale. 

(State terms as to place of delivery, storage, allowance for return 

waste, etc.) 


















Remarks. 

Total actual deliveries during year: .tons_ 

Total amount paid for freight and cartage. 

Total commissions. 

Total discounts. 

Administration expense chargeable to selling department 
Other selling expense, if any (specify expense). 



Net amount received from sales... $ 

Average net price. S 

Highest net price. $ 

Lowest net price. $ 

• 









































Part II. 


PRODUCTION OF PULP AND PAPER IN THE UNITED STATES. 

The news-print paper producing capacity of the United States 
under ordinary conditions exceeds one and one-third million tons 
per annum, which is more than one-fourth of all kinds of paper 
produced. 

There are 824 plants making paper of some kind, and the total 
paper productive capacity is 5,196,398 tons. Thirty States, counting 
the District of Columbia as a State, produce paper in some of its 
forms. 


Table 1 . —Productive capacity, in tons, of mills in the United States making each specified 

kind of paper, by States. 


States. 

News¬ 

print 

and 

hanging. 

Writing. 

Book. 

Tissue. 

Wrap¬ 

ping. 

Board. 

Special¬ 

ties. 

Building 

and 

sheath¬ 

ing. 

Total. 

United States.. 

California. 

1,&5,321 

210,617 

786,163 

102,539 

1,020,914 

1,190,214 

181,697 

368,933 

5,196,398 





10,548 
10,110 
1,377 

10,955 
94,057 


8,576 

30,079 
133,745 
22,943 
2,504 
211,212 
218,693 
22,380 
8,263 
5,478 
623,590 
71,364 
422,926 
310,309 
60,472 
15,650 
216,283 
170,742 
1,117,567 
11,487 
371,594 
74,275 
419,107 
30 
5,634 
12,677 
66,919 
56,810 
36,590 
30,831 
446,244 

Connecticut. 

7,825 

5,008 

908 
20,877 

4,632 

157 

11,205 

532 

2,504 

Delaware. 


Dist. of Columbia 
Illinois. 









13,146 
44,509 
8,295 
4,100 
5,478 
117,062 
2,254 
9,171 
66,419 

131,867 
139,066 
5,227 
4,163 

66,200 
20,095 
8,858 

Indiana. 

10,548 


4,476 



Iowa . 




Kansas. 






Louisiana. 







Maine. 

346,178 
6,792 
15,932 
11,581 
45,072 
15,650 
124,480 

14,085 

107,985 
50,737 
128,737 
75,746 


38,280 
5,947 
86,983 
107,578 
10,955 



Maryland. 



5,634 
51,676 
20,971 
4,445 

Massachusetts... 
Michigan. 

103,634 
16,589 

4,664 

1,252 

22,129 
10,173 

Minnesota,. 

Missouri. 






New Hampshire. 
New Jersey. 


14.586 
5,947 
67,577 

8,764 
7,888 
46,762 

52,928 
14,398 
224,734 
6,260 
66,794 

18.874 

97.875 

10,830 
107,140 
208,178 
5,227 
120,192 

4,695 

344 

43,883 



35,025 
35,463 

New York...:_ 

490,158 

814 

North Carolina.. 

Ohio. 

4,695 
55,088 
10,204 

23,099 

92,711 

1,972 

22,254 
313 
4,914 

39,876 

Oregon . 

Pennsylvania.... 
Rhode Island.... 

11,080 

121,100 

876 

80,879 

92,179 
30 

South Carolina.. 





3,756 
12,677 
14,523 
11,268 
13,709 
22,693 
167,956 


1,878 

Texas. 







Vermont. 

17,059 



16,620 

4,006 

5,321 

14,711 

9,547 


Virginia. 

2,504 

28,170 
7,825 


W ashington. 

15,055 



West Virginia_ 



5,008 

8,357 

3,130 

9,390 


Wisconsin. 

159,004 

33,804 

58,781 

8,952 





Table 1, page 20, compiled from the records of the American 
Paper & Pulp Association, which is the most reliable available 
source, represents productive capacity, and not actual output. In 
news-print paper are included news print in rolls and in sheets, and 
also hanging paper made in news-print mills. Hanging paper, when 
made in news-print mills, is made at practically identical cost of 

20 



























































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 21 

production, the increased output making up for the additional cost 
in sizing. 

The census reports for 1909 show 1,091,000 tons of roll print and 
85,000 tons of sheet as the actual production for that year, a total 
of 1,176,000 tons. The Census Bureau gives 92,000 tons as the 
output of hanging paper, which, taken with the 1,176,000 tons of 
news print, gives 1,268,000 as the actual output in 1909, whereas 
Table 1, page 20, gives 1,335,321 tons as the productive capacity of 
these plants in 1910, a difference of 67,321 tons between rated 
capacity for production in 1910 and actual production in 1909; that 
is, the production was slightly less than 95 per cent of present 
capacity. 

The inclusion of hanging paper with news print is made necessary 
by the fact that some plants make both on the same machines and 
make no distinction between them either in their output or costs. 
The fact that the same plants are and can be used for both shows 
that so far as productive capacity is concerned segregation is not 
important. Plants making hanging could change to news print, or 
vice versa, on demand. 

The census tables follow: 

Table 2.— Quantity and value of products—Comparative summary: 1909, 1904, and 

1899. 




Census— 


Per cent 
of in- 

Items. 

1909 

1904 

1899 

crease, 
1899 to 
1909. 

Number of establishments. 

787 

761 

763 

3 

Products, total value. 

$207,869,000 

$188,716,000 

$127,327,000 

110 

News paper— 

In rolls, for printing— 



Tons. 

1,091,000 

841,000 

455,000 

140 

Value. 

$42,807,000 

$32,763,000 

$15,755,000 

172 

In sheets, for printing— 


Tons. 

85,000 

72.000 

114,000 

i 25 

Value. 

$4,049,000 

$3,143,000 

$4,337,000 

7 

Book paper— 

Book— 



Tons. 

575,000 

435,000 

282,000 

104 

Value. 

$42,803,000 

$31,157,000 

$19,467,000 

120 

Cover— 




Tons. 

16,000 

22,000 

19,000 

» 16 

Value. 

$1,761,000 

$2,024,000 

$1,665,000 

6 

Plate, lithograph, map, woodcut, etc.— 


Tons. 

9,000 

20,000 

22,000 

» 59 

Value. 

$821,000 

$1,458,000 

$2,019,000 

i 59 

Cardboard, Bristol board, card, middles, 


tickets, etc.— 

Tons. 

51,000 

39,000 

29,000 

76 

Value.:. 

$3,352,000 

$2,765,000 

$1,720,000 

95 

Coated paper— 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 


Tons . 

95,200 

$9,414,000 


Value 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 


Fine paper— 


Writing paper— 


132,000 


88 

Tons. 

169,000 

90,000 

Value. 

$24,966,000 

$19,321,000 

$12,223,000 

104 

All other fine paper— 


23,000 

26 

Tons. 

29,000 

15,000 

Value. 

$4,111,000 

$2,928,000 

$3,673,000 

12 

Wrapping paper— 

Manila (rope, jute, tag, etc.)— 


87,000 

89,000 

i 17 

Tons. 

74,000 

Value. 

$7,012,000 

$6,136,000 

$5,930,000 

18 

Heavy wrapping (mill wrappers, etc.)— 

109,000 

97,000 

83,000 

31 

Tons.*. 

Value. 

$4,431,000 

$4,036,000 

$4,143,000 

7 

i Decrease. 

2 Not reported separately. 














































22 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 2.— Quantity and value of products—Comparative summary: 1909, 1904, and 

1899 —Continued. 




Census— 


Per cent 
of in- 

Items. 

1909 

1904 

1899 

crease, 
1899 to 
1909. 

Products, total value—Continued. 

Wrapping paper—Continued. 

Straw wrapping— 




i 04 

Tons. 

33,000 

54,000 

92,000 

Value.:. 

$871,000 

$1,389,000 

$2,028,000 

i 57 

Bogus, or wood manila, all grades— 

80 

Tons. 

368,000 

228,000 

204,000 

Value. 

$19,780,000 

$10,100,000 

$9,149,000 

116 

All other wrapping paper— 

169 

Tons. 

180,000 

178,000 

67,000 

Value. 

$10,202,000 

$8,775,000 

$3,293,000 

210 

Boards— 

Wood-pulp board— 


Tons. 

71,000 

61,000 

44,000 

61 

Value. 

$2,639,000 

$2,347,000 

$1,406,000 

8S 

Strawboard— 


Tons. 

172,000 

167,000 

158,000 

9 

Value. 

$3,751,000 

$4,368,000 

$3,187,000 

18 

News board— 


Tons. 

75,000 

39,000 

32,000 

134 

Value. 

$2,215,000 

$1,174,000 

$931,000 

138 

All other boards— 


Tons. 

514,000 

254,000 

132,000 

289 

Value. 

$17,540,000 

$9,071,000 

$4,829,000 

263 

Other paper products— 

Tissues— 


Tons. 

78,000 

44,000 

28,000 

179 

Value. 

$8,554,000 

$5,056,000 

$3,487,000 

145 

Blotting paper— 


Tons. 

10,000 

9,000 

4,000 

$581,000 

150 

Value. 

$1,180,000 

$1,047,000 

104 

Building, roofing, and sheathing paper— 

97,000 


Tons. 

218,000 

145,000 

125 

Value . 

$8,944,000 

$4,846,000 

$3,026,000 

196 

Hanging paper— 


Tons. 

92,000 

63,000 

54,000 

70 

Value. 

$4,332,000 

$3,014,000 

$2,265,000 

91 

Miscellaneous— 


Tons. 

104,000 

106,000 

49,000 

112 

Value. 

$7,141,000 

$6,730,000 

$2,796,000 

155 

Wood pulp made for sale— 

Ground— 


Tons. 

315,000 

273,000 

280,000 

13 

Value. 

$5,736,000 

$4,323,000 

$4,434,000 

29 

Soda fiber— 


Tons. 

161,000 

130,000 

99,000 

63 

Value. 

$6,770,000 

$5,160,000 

$3,613,000 

87 

Sulphite fiber— 


Tons. 

444,000 

377,000 

272,000 

63 

Value. 

$17,943,000 

$13,661,000 

$10,451,000 

72 

All other products, value... 

$4,738,000 

$1,924,000 

$919,000 

416 


1 Decrease. 


The ground wood and chemical pulp productive capacity in the 
United States is indicated by the following table, likewise compiled 
from the records of the American Paper & Pulp Association, and 
shows 192 ground wood pulp mills, having 1,485 grinders, producing 
2,008,680 tons of air-dry ground wood pulp; 90 sulphite plants, pro¬ 
ducing 1,204,894 tons of air-dry sulphite fiber (bleached and un¬ 
bleached); and 31 soda pulp plants, producing 417,387 air-dry tons 
of that commodity. 

There are 555 digesters installed in the United States. The 
distributions of these between sulphite and soda pulp is not here 
attempted. Twenty-one States produce pulp of some kind and to 
some extent, as will be found detailed in the table. 


















































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


23 


Table 3. —Productive capacity of wood-pulp mills, by specified kinds of pulp, by States 

and for the United States. 


Ground-wood pulp. 


Sulphite pulp. 


Num¬ 
ber of 
mills. 


Grind¬ 

ers. 


United States 


192 


1,485 


Tons (air 
dry) pro¬ 
duced in 
1910. 


2,008,680 


Num¬ 
ber of 
mills. 


Tons (air 
dry) pro¬ 
duced in 
1910. 


90 


1,204,894 


California. 

Delaware. 

Indiana. 

Maine. 

Maryland. 

Massachusetts.. 

Michigan. 

Minnesota. 

New Hampshire 

New York. 

North Carolina.. 

Ohio. 

Oregon. 

Pennsylvania... 
South'Carolina.. 

Texas. 

Vermont. 

Virginia. 

Washington. 

West Virginia... 
Wisconsin. 


1 


4 


6,260 


6,260 


1 

26 


4 2,504 

329 491,880 


12 


189,991 


3 

5 

6 
8 

83 

2 

2 

5 

2 

1 


11 

20 

38 

101 

518 

7 

10 

81 

5 

1 


16,902 
21,128 
53,210 
127,078 
755,739 
9,547 
13,146 
103,603 
8,138 
1,252 



15,024 

58,844 


165,577 
297,350 
28,953 
37,560 
37,560 
69,173 
1,878 


9 

2 

1 

2 

33 


88 

5 

10 

8 

245 


76,842 

8,138 

10,955 

15,024 

287,334 


1 

1 

1 

3 

19 


11,268 

26,605 

15,650 

43,820 

199,381 


Soda pulp. 

Num¬ 
ber of 
mills. 

Tons (air 
dry) pro¬ 
duced in 
1910. 

31 

417,387 



1 

19,563 

5 

2 

1 

112,680 

32,865 

2,504 





. 

4 

3 

1 

57,592 

46,950 

4,695 

10 

102,195 

1 

11,738 

2 

1 

18,780 

7,825 






Digest¬ 

ers. 


555 


3 

7 


91 

12 

17 

27 


33 

117 

17 

11 

10 

104 

2 

5 

6 
17 
10 

6 

GO 


































































Part III. 

COST OF PRODUCTION IN THE UNITED STATES. 

(a) EXPLANATORY STATEMENT. 

The figures given are for manufacturing costs at the mill with 
each item as actually carried on the books. It should be carefully 
noted, however, that there are certain items in the blank schedules 
which are not included in the figures submitted. 

First. Depreciation, it was found, was not carried as a cost item on 
the books of the manufacturers generally. Not more than 5 per cent 
of the tonnage w r as made by firms so carrying depreciation. Even 
with these the basis for the charge consisted of widely varying esti¬ 
mates of the amount which ought to be so charged. In this report, 
therefore, no account is taken of depreciation in the general table of 
costs, but a separate statement of depreciation is made, based upon 
the estimates and experiences of engineers whose business it is to 
build paper and pulp mills. (See p. 73.) By excluding depreciation 
from the general cost tables, the establishments are brought into the 
table on a uniform basis. 

Second. The figures do not include interest either on the capital 
invested or on borrowed capital. 

Third. There is no charge for water power except in the case of a 
few mills which rent their pow T er from other companies. In almost 
all cases power development is reckoned as a part of the plant and 
not charged in separately. 

Certain other facts must also be considered: 

Wood is raw material for pulp and both kinds of pulp are raw 
material for paper. If pulp mills bought all their wood in the open 
market and if paper mills bought all their pulp in the open market 
these charges would be very simple. Complexity arises from the 
different methods of accounting on the part of mills that produce 
their own raw material. One pulp mill may charge in its wood cut 
from its own lands at the actual cost delivered to the mill, which 
because of favorable conditions may be very low. In the case of 
another company operating under similar circumstances, a pulp mill 
may be charged with the wood at the current market price and the 
difference entered as .a profit on the lumbering operations. In the 
estimate of the actual cost of wood, one company ma}~ charge only a 
nominal stumpage, while another may charge stumpage at the cur¬ 
rent rates, or even higher. 

In the same w r ay, a paper mill operated in connection with a pulp 
mill may charge in pulp at cost, showing no profit on the pulp mill; 
or it may charge it in at market value, entering the difference to the 
profit of the pulp mill. Obviously, the cost of paper per ton and the 
margin of profit per ton, as shown by the books, will depend upon 
the methods adopted. Some companies prefer to charge in mate¬ 
rials of their own at a very low figure, thereby showing a high margin 
of profit per ton on the finished product. Another company may 
make its charges in such a w T ay as to show a large margin of profit 
per cord of wood or ton of pulp, and a very low margin of profit, or 
even an apparent loss on a ton of paper. The apparent cost of paper 

24 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


25 


in the two cases might be widely different, although if the figures were 
analyzed and reduced to the same basis they might show substan¬ 
tially the same result. It is a question of how far profits are charged 
in on the transfer of material from one department to another of the 
same concern. 

In the tables here presented an effort has been made to reduce 
all items to a uniform basis for all plants before combining them 
into totals. While on the one hand the figures in the tables give 
costs as shown bv the manufacturers’ books, all costs have been 
gone over, and the stumpage, profits on woodland operations in 
excess of stumpage, profits on transfers of pulps from mill to mill, 
have been considered and a statement made of their amounts, so 
far as the actual returns show. That is to say, while the costs are 
given as the board found them to be on the books, information is 
given by which the uncertain elements of depreciation and interest 
may be considered and the elements of stumpage and profit on trans¬ 
fers are shown for the proportion of cost figures into which they enter. 

Under repairs and maintenance some concerns charge all work 
done to keep up the efficiency of the plant. This includes both 
repair work, strictly speaking, including renewals which may have 
involved betterments in some cases, though this is not a serious item. 
Renewals which ought to be spread over a series of years are, it is 
true, in some cases charged in; but as these are spread over a num¬ 
ber of plants for one year rather than one plant for several years, the 
final average is not seriously disturbed. No revision of this item is 
possible without an audit of every item of expense charged to the 
repair account for the time covered by the investigation. 

If new construction is charged to repairs, the cost per ton for the 
period in question is, of course, enhanced; also, where figures are 
taken for only one year, it is possible that repair costs are included 
which should be properly distributed over several years. A mill may 
run for a long period with a very low charge for maintenance and 
repairs and then may pay for it by heavy expenditures during a few 
months. The figures which we have secured show, in some cases, 
charges under this head which would appear on their face to be abnor¬ 
mal, but which are explained by facts of this kind. In such cases a 
correct idea can be obtained by including only the proportion of the 
repairs normally chargeable to that year. 

In the case of mills equipped with machines which are out of date, 
the cost would be increased not only by the lower efficiency of the 
machines, but by the more constant need for repair because of age; 
and the figures secured show wide divergencies in these items. 

Where monthly figures have been secured, it appears that the costs 
in a single mill vary greatly from month to month of a given year. 
If the margin between selling price and manufacturing cost were 
taken on a basis of the best month, it would give an entirely wrong 
impression of the facts. Consequently contingencies of various kinds 
must be fairly considered, as in the case of every industry. Where 
an industry is dependent on water power, monthly cost will vary 
largely according to head of water;' but if a period of 12 months is 
covered the ordinary season of fluctuations would disappear in the 
yearly average. Allowance must be made, however, for unusual and 
disastrous water conditions, either in the way of drought or flood. 
The nature of these problems will, however, appear more clearly under 
the section on Investment and Depreciation. 


26 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


In the next place it should be carefully remembered that the figures 
as here submitted do not include any statements as to capital invest¬ 
ment. The relation of mill costs to selling price at the mill may be 
entirety misinterpreted by one not familiar with the investment of 
capital necessary for given output. Obviously the margin of profit 
per ton indicates of itself nothing as to the earnings on capital. 

Finalty, two other points arise in connection with the manufacture 
of pulp and paper which involve very difficult questions. These are 
due to the fact that the industry is dependent upon two natural 
resources—the forest for its raw material and water for its power. 

Reference has already been made to the various methods employed 
by different concerns in estimating the value of stump age in the cost 
of wood. A company which in former years secured valuable lands 
and water privileges at low prices can, by simply adding carrying 
charges into cost, show a figure for cost of production far below that 
of a new enterprise in the same locality. On the other hand, the com¬ 
pany may, of course, prefer to hold its own land intact and buy wood 
in the market, if it believes that more will be gained by the increase in 
value of its timber than will be lost by the higher cost, for the mo¬ 
ment, of its wood. The whole problem of the figure at which wood is 
charged into cost is, of course, inevitably bound up with the whole 
question of the appreciation of timber-land values. 

The question of water power is of much the same kind. Unlike 
wood, it enters into the strict conversion cost. The development of 
the power represents a part of the capital investment. It is simply 
carried in this way and might naturally be expected to yield the same 
rate of profit on original investment as the balance of the capital 
employed. 

The question arises, however, in case water power in a given section 
is increasing in value through demand for other purposes and com¬ 
petition of other industries, whether or not earnings to this extent 
will be adequate to keep an existing business established. In some 
cases mills are operating near industrial centers where water power 
converted into electrical power is selling at a very high price. Such 
mills, if charging power to themselves at current rates would show a 
prohibitive cost of manufacture. 

These observations are made because it is essential to distinguish 
between strict cost figures and the margin between costs and prices. 
The former must be presented as actual costs of manufacture regard¬ 
less of the investment. The question of what is a reasonable margin, 
however, inevitably involves a consideration not only of the original 
investment but of the appreciation in value of natural resources con¬ 
trolled, and their availability for other competing uses. In present¬ 
ing the actual figures of cost, as shown from the books of the con¬ 
cerns, reference may be made to the somewhat widespread opinion 
that we should report not on actual costs but on some assumed 
cost for a supposedly “ normal plant.” This will be considered 
later, in Part X. 

(b) tables and comment on cost of production. 

The following cost tables have been compiled for a period of 12 
months in the case of each mill. In all cases the last normal fiscal 
year was taken. The majority of the reports are for the year 1909. 


PULP AND NEWS-PKINT PAPER. 27 

These figures should be considered with careful reference to the 
preceding explanatory statement. 

Table 4.— Summary of the cost of manufacture of ground-wood 'puljp, sulphite fiber, and 
news-print paper, showing total cost, highest, lowest, and average cost per ton of product, 
by specified items of cost for mills in the United States reporting data. 


Items. 

Total cost of 
specified items 
in mills 
reporting. 

Cost per ton of product. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

Ground-wood pulp: 

Wood. 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs. 

Total cost in bulk at mills. 

Sulphite fiber: 

Wood. 

$7,418,586. 42 
1,578,215. 95 
1,581,946.95 

$6.90 

.98 

.30 

$13.33 
5. 90 
6.83 

$10.23 
2.18 
2.18 

10,578,749.32 

9.80 

21.32 

14.59 

8,204,140. 66 
1,695,108.86 
4,223, 442.32 

13.28 
2.09 
6. 72 

25. 89 
6. 51 
14.68 

18.58 
3.84 
9.57 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs. 

Total cost in bulk at mills. 

14,122,691.84 

24. 47 

40.16 

31.99 

News-print paper: 

Materials— 

Ground-wood pulp. 

12,481,616.83 
8,118,307. 55 
785,481.02 

8.26 
6.45 
.32 

18. 54 
14.12 
3.25 

13.27 

8.63 

.84 

Sulphite fiber. 

Other materials. 

Total materials. 

21,385,405. 40 
3,075,148.88 
6,460,846.11 

15. 64 
2.19 
4.63 

29.22 

7.26 

10.05 

22. 74 
3.27 
6.87 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs. .7. 

Total cost in bulk at mills. 

30,921,400.39 

24.50 

43. 00 

32.88 



Table 5. —Cost of production of ground-wood pulp, sulphite fiber, and news-print 
paper in the United States, by classified rates of cost per ton. 


Total cost per ton. 

Number 
of estab¬ 
lish¬ 
ments. 

Tons 

produced. 

Per cent 
of total 
produc¬ 
tion. 

Average 
cost 
in each 
group. 

Ground-wood pulp: 

Under $10. 

2 

111,966.6 
50.116.1 

107.164.8 
197,355.3 

246.989.8 
11,661.3 

15.4 

$9.90 

$10 and under $12. 

4 

6.9 

10.90 

$12 and under $14. 

7 

14.8 

13.48 

$14 and under $16. 

16 

27.2 

15.18 

$16 and under $20. 

22 

34.1 

17.18 

$20 or over. 

2 

1.6 

20. 58 



Total. 

53 

725,253.9 

100.0 

14. 59 



Sulphite fiber: 

$24 and under $26. 

1 

37,725.0 

67.731.2 

84.728.2 
130,851.3 

94,711.4 

8.5 

24. 47 

$26 and under $30. 

5 

15.3 

28.93 

$30 and under $32. 

5 

19.2 

31.17 

$32 and under $34. 

5 

29.7 

33.15 

$34 and under $36. 

6 

21.5 

34. 89 

$36 or over. 

3 

25,711.4 

5.8 

37.14 





Total... . 

25 

441,458.6 

100.0 

31.99 


News-print paper: 

Under $25 . 

1 

45,022.2 

4.8 

24.50 

$25 and under $30. 

4 

170,319.8 

18.1 

26.18 

$30 and under $32.50. 

7 

210,215.7 

205.992.3 

107.373.4 
194,604.3 

22.4 

31.96 

$32 SO and under $35.. 

7 

21.9 

34.07 

$35 and under .$37.50. 

6 

11.4 

36.03 

$37.50 and under $40. 

12 

20.7 

38.31 

$40 or over . 

1 

6,950.4 

.7 

43.00 





Tefal . 

38 

940. 478.1 

100.0 

32.88 




















































































28 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 6. —Manufacturing labor cost 'per ton of ground wood pulp, sulphite fiber, and 
news-print paper, by classified rates for mills in the United States reporting data. 


Range of labor cost per ton of product. 

Number 
of estab¬ 
lish¬ 
ments. 

Tons pro¬ 
duced. 

Per cent 
of total 
tons pro¬ 
duced. 

Average 
cost per 
ton. 

Ground wood pulp: 




$0. 98 

Under $1.. 

1 

38,498.5 

5.3 

$1 and under $1.50. 

2 

26,599. 3 

3.7 

1.34 

$1.50 and under $2. 

16 

302,964. 6 

41.8 

1.69 

$2 and under $2.50. 

11 

134,869. 0 

18.6 

2.33 

$2.50 and under $3. 

11 

146,827.9 

20.2 

2.81 

$3 and under $3.50. 

7 

36,374. 3 

5.1 

3.26 

$3.50 and under $4. 

4 

36,484. 3 

5.0 

3.59 

$4 and over. 

1 

2,636.0 

.3 

5.90 

Total. 

53 

725,253.9 

100.0 

2.18 

Sulphite fiber: 


34,863. 3 



Under $2.50. 

2 

7.9 

2. 26 

$2.50 and under $3. 

4 

71,094.1 

16.1 

2. 87 

$3 and under $3.50. 

3 

51,055.2 

11.6 

3.41 

$3.50 and under $4. 

4 

51,023.8 

11.5 

3. 86 

$4 and under $4.50. 

5 

156,356.8 

35.4 

4.15 

$4.50 and under $5. 

4 

49,871.3 

27,194.6 

11.3 

4.71 

$5 and over. 

3 

6.2 

5.78 

Total... 

25 

441,458.5 

100.0 

3. 84 

News-print paper: 

$2 and under $2.50. 

2 

93,286. 9 

9.9 

2. 24 

$2.50 and under $3. 

5 

297,275.5 

31.6 

2.84 

$3 and under $3.50. 

10 

225,901.7 

24.0 

3. 20 

$3.50 and under $4. 

9 

192,079.3 

20.4 

3.65 

$4 and under $4.50. 

9 

104,569.2 

11.1 

4. 22 

$4.50 and under $5. 

1 

12,077.3 

1.3 

4.85 

$5 and under $6. 

1 

8.337.8 

.9 

5. 63 

$6 and over. 

1 

6,950. 4 

.8 

7.26 

Total. 

38 

940,478.1 

100.0 

3.27 


COST OF PRODUCTION OF GROUND WOOD PULP. 

Ground wood-pulp schedules are here tabulated from 53 pulp mills 
in the United States, m©st of them operated in connection with news¬ 
print paper mills, and all making mechanical pulp of the grade and 
quality entering into news-print paper. These 53 mills produced 
725,253.9 tons of pulp at a cost of $10,578,749.32, or at a consequent 
total average cost of $14.59 per ton. The lowest cost in any mill was 
$9.80, the highest $21.32, showing a difference between the highest 
and lowest cost greater than the total lowest cost. The wood cost 
per ton of pulp ranges from $6.90 for the lowest to $13.33 for the 
highest, with an average of $10.23. These variations are due partly 
to local conditions and partly to divergent methods of bookkeep¬ 
ing, as already explained in the preceding “Explanatory statement/* 

By manufacturing labor is meant the labor which is applied directly 
to materials in process; it does not include labor expended in repair 
of machinery nor upkeep of plant. Table 7 will show repair labor 
per ton of product for both the pulps and for paper, and this repair 
labor item must not be confused with process labor. Process labor 
in pulp and paper mills has been made to include labor engaged in 
production of power, i. e., engineers, firemen, etc. This was made 
necessary because paper and pulp manufacturers do not keep their 
immediately productive labor so carefully distinct from nonproductive 
and contributory labor, as do manufacturers in some other lines. It 
was, however, always possible to separate repair labor from that more 













































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


29 


directly engaged in production. The extreme variation in the labor 
costs is due neither to difference in individual efficiency of labor nor 
to that in equipment, since the equipment of the grinding rooms is 
fairly similar in all mills under investigation. The difference is prin¬ 
cipally due to variations in available water power. A grinder built to 
operate under, say, 600 horsepower, and of a capacity of from 6 to 8 
tons per da}^ will "turn out its full quota when water is plentiful and 
work is conducted under full pressure. As the water supply dimin¬ 
ishes the productivity of the grinder rapidly falls off without allow¬ 
ing for any saving in the labor. The result is that the same amount 
of labor produces twice as much in one case as it will in another. The 
variation under the heading of other costs is likewise very wide. This 
item covers a large number of cost elements, such as repairs, gen¬ 
eral supplies, general works expense, office expense, etc., which will 
differ according to the age of the plant, the scale on which operations 
are conducted, etc. 

Manufacturing labor cost averaged $2.18 per ton for the entire 
tonnage reporting, but shows a range of from 98 cents for lowest 
to $5.90 for highest. Other costs average $2.18 per ton with a 
wide range between highest and lowest. The significance of the 
range in total cost and manufacturing labor cost is shown in Tables 
5 and 6. Two plants produce 111,966.6 tons of pulp, or 15.4 
per cent of the tonnage reported, at an average total cost of $9.90 
per ton; 7 plants produce 14.8 per cent of the total tonnage, at 
an average of $13.48 per ton, that is to say, 37.1 per cent of the 
total reporting tonnage, or 269,247.5 tons, are produced at a figure 
under $14 per ton as a total cost. Sixteen establishments produce 
27.2 per cent of the tonnage, at an average of $15.18 per ton and 
between the ranges of $14 and $16. The largest tonnage in a 
single group of costs falls between $16 and $20, with an average of 
$17.18 per ton; this group of 22 plants out of 53, produces 246,989.9 
tons, or 34.1 per cent of the total. 

The manufacturing labor cost per ton of ground wood pulp ranges 
in the tables from 98 cents to $5.90 per ton, 5.3 per cent of the 
tonnage being produced in one mill at the 98-cent cost; while only 
three-tenths of 1 per cent is produced at the highest figure. Both 
of these costs are therefore unusual in the industry. The table shows 
that the highest percentage of production falling into a single classified 
range of manufacturing labor cost falls in the $1.50 and under $2 
group. Nearly 42 per cent (41.8) of the total tonnage reporting 
comes between these figures, and is produced at an average of $1.69 
per ton, while the average manufacturing labor cost for all is $2.18 
per ton; 50.8 per cent of the reported production carries a manu¬ 
facturing labor cost of less than $2 per ton; 18.6 per cent carries an 
average cost of $2.33; 20.2 per cent an average cost of $2.81, while 
80.6 per cent of the total is produced at a cost for manufacturing 
labor ranging between $1.50 as the lowest, and $2.99 as the highest. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF SULPHITE PULP. 

In the case of sulphite pulp there is likewise a wide range of cost, 
although not so great as in the case of ground wood. Here, too, the 
chief cause of variation in cost lies in the item of wood cost. The 
variation in the cost of wood alone is almost equal to that in the total 


30 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


cost of pulp, and therefore goes far to account for the latter. The causes 
are the same as in the case of ground pulp. It should also be borne 
in mind that the variations in cost of wood per ton of product are 
influenced by the skill with which the raw material is utilized. In 
the case of ground wood pulp our figures show considerable variation 
in the quantity of wood entering into a ton of product, showing the 
effect of variations in the amount of waste. Similar variations 
appear in the cost of wood for sulphite mills, as determined by the 
skill employed in cooking. 

The great divergence in the cost of labor per ton of sulphite is due 
principally to the difference in the size of the digesters used by the 
different companies. The capacity of a digester depends upon its 
size and cubical contents; but the labor required to handle the out¬ 
put of the digester is practically independent of its size. As a conse¬ 
quence, a digester of a given size will require practically the same 
amount of labor as one one-half its size, which will naturally result 
in the labor cost per ton of sulphite of the one being twice that of the 
other. 

From the tables submitted it will be seen that 25 sulphite pulp 
mills in the United States from which reports were obtained produced 
an aggregate of 441,458.6 tons of chemical pulp during the period 
covered by the schedules; the total cost as carried on the books of 
the firms was $14,122,691.84; the average total cost per ton being 
$31.99. The average cost of wood as a raw material per ton of pulp 
was $18.58; the manufacturing labor cost $3.84, and the other costs, 
$9.57, making, as stated, the total of $31.99. 

The range of costs as shown in the table, from highest to lowest is 
quite wide; wood costs ranging from $13.28 per ton of pulp to $25.89; 
labor costs from $2.09 1 to $6.51, and other costs from $6.72 to $14.68; 
total costs from $24.47 to $40.16. 

The significance of this range is brought out in Table 6, which 
classifies the total cost by groups showing the percentage of the total 
in each group and the average by groups. That is to say, 8.5 per cent 
of the total production reported was produced at a total cost of 
between $24 and $26 per ton, the average for this group being $24.47, 
while 15.3 per cent was produced at an average cost of $28.93 per 
ton, 19.2 per cent at $31.17, 29.7 per cent at an average of $33.15, 

1 In order to analyze in detail the labor cost for mills producing at the lowest cost, a comparison has been 
made of two mills showing all labor charges for the lowest sulphite mill in Canada and the lowest in the 
United States. 


Comparison and analysis of the lowest manufacturing labor costs per ton of sulphite pulp in the United States 

and Canada. 


Departments of manufacture. 

United 

States. 

Canada. 

Wood handling. 

SC. 30 
.23 
.17 
.31 
.10 
.26 
.10 
.12 
.02 
.49 

SO. 20 
.36 
.14 
.21 
.05 
. 50 
.08 
.05 
.11 
.16 

W ood room. 

Acid plant. 

Digesters. 

Screens. 

Presses. 

Indoor labor, miscellaneous. 

Outdoor labor, miscellaneous. 

Foremen. 

Steam plant. 

Total manufacturing labor cost. 

2.09 

1.86 


























PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


31 


21.5 per cent at $34.89, while 5.8 per cent of the total was produced 
at an average total cost of $37.14 per ton. 

A study of the labor costs in the manufacture of chemical fiber 
or sulphite is interesting in respect to this question of range. Two 
plants have a manufacturing-labor cost under $2.50 per ton, the aver¬ 
age being $2.26 per ton; these plants produce 7.9 per cent of the ton¬ 
nage reported. Four plants have a labor cost ranging between $2.50 
and $2.99, the average here being $2.87, 16.1 per cent of the total 
tonnage reported being produced at this average rate and between the 
amounts named; 11.6 per cent of the tonnage was produced in three 
plants at a labor cost of between $3 and $3.49. the average being 
$3.41; four plants produce 11.5 per cent of the reported tonnage at 
an average manufacturing labor cost of $3.86 per ton within the 
range indicated by $3.50 to $3.99; five plants produce 35.4 per cent 
of the reported tonnage at a labor cost ranging from $4 to $4.49, the 
average being $4.15 per ton; four plants producing 11.3 per cent of 
the reported tonnage have a labor cost ranging from $4.50 to $4.99, 
with an average of $4.71; three plants produce 6.2 per cent at an 
average of $5.78 per ton, the average for the 25 plants and the total 
tonnage reported, i. e., 441,458.51 tons, is $3.84 per ton. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 

Table 4 presents a summary of the cost of news-print paper in 
38 mills in the United States, producing 940,478.1 tons of paper in 
the schedule period, at a total cost of $30,921,400.39, or an average 
total cost of production of $32.88 per ton. The lowest total cost 
in any one mill was $24.50; the highest, $43. The range in cost of 
ground-wood, pulp per ton of finished paper is from $8.26 to $18.54, 
with an average for all of $13.27; for sulphite pulp the range is from 
$6.45 as the lowest to $14.12 for highest, the average being $8.63; 
for all materials the average cost was $22.74 per ton of paper, with 
a range of from $15.64 to $29.22. 

The average cost of manufacturing labor is $3.27 per ton of paper, 
the range being from $2.19 to $7.26. The significance of these wide 
ranges in costs is brought out in Tables 5 and 6, in which the 
establishments are classified by cost ranges and the percentage of 
production within each classification is shown. 

For instance, the plant producing at the lowest cost of $24.50 per 
ton produces but 4.8 per cent of the reported tonnage; only one 
plant produces at the highest rate, and its production is but seven- 
tenths of 1 per cent of the reported tonnage. Four plants produce 
18.1 per cent, at an average total cost of $26.18. Seven plants pro¬ 
duce 210,215.7 tons, or 22.4 per cent of the reported tonnage, at an 
average cost of $31.96; seven other plants produce 21.9 per cent of 
the total, at an average of $34.07 per ton; while 25 of the 38 establish¬ 
ments produce 78.6 per cent of the reported tonnage below $37.50; 
while 12 establishments produce 194,604.3 tons, or 20.7 per cent of 
the tonnage, at an average of $38.31 per ton. 

From Table 6 it will be seen that the higher manufacturing-labor 
costs represent but a small fraction of the total tonnage reported. The 
lowest average manufacturing-labor cost in the classified group is $2.24, 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


32 

and 9.9 per cent of the reported tonnage is produced at this cost for 
manufacturing labor; 31.6 per cent is produced at an average of $2.84 
per ton. That is to say, 41.5 per cent of the total is produced at con¬ 
siderably less than the average of the whole, while an additional 24 
per cent is produced at an average of $3.20, which is less than the 
average of the whole. An amount equal to 20.4 per cent of the total 
reported tonnage is produced at an average cost of manufacturing labor 
of $3.65 per ton; 11.1 per cent at an average of $4.22 per ton. 

Taking the average of the manufacturing-labor cost for ground- 
wood pulp ($2.18) and for sulphite pulp ($3.84), and considering that 
paper uses 80 per cent of ground wood and 20 per cent of sulphite, the 
total manufacturing-labor cost from the rough wood to the finished 
paper would be $5,782 per ton; that is to say, 80 per cent of $2.18 is 
$1,744, 20 percent of $3.84 is $0,768, and these added to the $3.27 
labor cost in the paper itself gives a cost of manufacturing labor from 
rough wood to paper of $5,782 on the average. 


Table 7. —Average cost per ton of product for specified items entering into the cost of pro¬ 
duction of ground-wood pulp , sulphite fiber, and news-print paper for mills in the 
United States reporting data. 



Average cost per ton of— 

Items. 

Ground 

wood. 

Sulphite 

fiber. 

News¬ 

print 

paper. 

W ood. 

$10. 20 

$18. 59 


Sulphur. 

3. 21 


Lime and limestone. 


.60 


Ground wood. . 


$13.16 

Sulphite. 



8.63 

Waste paper. 



.79 




.40 

Other materials. 



.42 

Manufacturing labor. 

2.18 

3.84 

3.27 

Pulp stones. 

.12 

Felts. 

.09 

.16 

.82 

Wires. 

.04 

.04 

.36 

Screen plates. 

. 10 

.09 

.05 

Belting. 

.07 

. 13 

.12 

Lubricants. 

.05 

.06 

.08 

Coal. 

.07 

2.07 

1.81 

Wood. 

.17 

.52 

Finishing materials. 


.86 

Other works expense. 

.27 

.52 

.69 

Water power. 

.93 

i .36 

2.31 

Repair materials. 

.57 

1.18 

.85 

Repair labor. 

.38 

.78 

.55 

Administration expense. 

.36 

.39 

.45 

Miscellaneous operating expense. 

.27 

.21 

.26 

Accident insurance... T... T. 

.03 

.04 

.03 

Fire insurance. 

.06 

.07 

.07 

Taxes. 

3 .24 

4 .25 

5.26 



1 Water-power costs reported by 8 establishments with tonnage of 204,340.8. 

2 Includes electric power in 3 mills having 13 per cent of the total product. 

3 Mills with 42.8 per cent of total production report fire insurance, accident insurance, and taxes combined. 

4 Mills with 28.3 per cent of total production report fire insurance, accident insurance, and taxes combined. 

5 Mills with 38 per cent of total production report fire insurance, accident insurance, and taxes combined. 


Table 7 gives the average cost of production in greater detail 
than is attempted in former tables. Elements of cost are here item¬ 
ized and the average for all mills from which such items were secured 
is given. 

In the table the three commodities, ground wood pulp, sulphite 
pulp, and news-print paper, have been put in separate columns on 











































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


33 


the same page. All the items in the list do not apply to each of the 
articles produced; but it is believed that by leaving the lines blank 
when the item does not apply there need be no confusion. For 
instance, pulp stones are an item of cost in ground wood only; sul¬ 
phur, lime, and limestone are used in sulphite pulp only; wood is of 
course used only in making pulp. 

In most cases the average costs in this table are made up of the 
whole volume of the given material used in all plants, and hence is a 
true average cost. In one or two mills, however, certain items were 
not secured and hence these items in this table were worked out on 
a tonnage different from the total of tonnage used in the other 
tables. In each case, however, the difference was slight, and these 
average costs by item may be accepted as indicating very closely 
the practices in the industry. 

In the case of water power charged, on ground wood pulp for 
instance, onty 8 concerns make such a charge, and these rent their 
water power. The water power charged by these 8 mills was divided 
by the tonnage produced by these mills, so that this is a true aver¬ 
age where water power is rented. 

One difficulty arises in the case of lime cost in sulphite pulp. 
Some plants use lime only, others limestone only, while a few used 
both during the schedule year. Limestone costs less, but more of it 
is required than of lime; and since some plants used both, it seemed 
statistically possible only to show the average cost of the lime ele¬ 
ment in sulphite pulp regardless of how it was secured; that is, 
whether secured from lime or limestone. 

Practically no other difficulties arose, so that with these explana¬ 
tions in mind the table can be safely used as indicated. 

S. Doe. 31, 62-1-3 



• i . 






Part IV. 

CANADIAN INVESTIGATION. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER IN CANADA. 

The schedules received by the board from Canada cover 13 ground - 
wood pulp mills, producing 305,699.4 tons of pulp, at a total cost of 
12,922,222.99. Of this amount 144,886.7 tons were produced for 
consumption in the same plant, and were run in “slush” state to the 
paper mills. Seven plants produced 160,812.7 tons in “lapped,” or 
pressed condition, for sale on the market as ground-wood pulp. 
Schedules were secured from 5 sulphite pulp mills producing 75,588 
tons of fiber at a total cost of $1,999,860.51. 

Reports were secured from 7 news-print paper mills carrying 
159,437.6 tons of paper, produced at a total cost of $4,389,567.18. 

In most instances the Canadian schedules covered a year’s busi¬ 
ness for the mill reporting, but in some cases the schedule period was 
for less than a year, and in these cases the data were reduced to a 
12-month basis for purposes of uniformity. The relative impor¬ 
tance of the schedules thus scaled up to a 12-month period was slight, 
only small mills being affected. 

Tables embodying the information for Canadian mills have been 
revised to include new schedules received since the publication of the 
first report. Certain errors, not important in themselves, crept into 
the former statement owing to the fact that some of the Canadian 
data used were received only a few hours before the completion of 
the first report. These tables as revised are presented here consecu¬ 
tively to make possible a discussion of the facts they contain in a 
single statement. These tables correspond in form and matter with 
those prepared for the mills in the United States. 

Table 8. —Summary of the cost of manufacture of ground-wood pulp, sulphite fiber , and 
news-print paper, showing total cost , highest , lowest, and average cost per ton of product , 
by specified items of cost , for mills in Canada reporting data. 


Items. 

Total cost. 

Range of cost per 
ton of products. 

Average. 



Lowest. 

Highest. 

Ground-wood pulp: 1 

Slush pulp— 





Wood. 

$848,367.03 

$4.69 

$9. 62 

$5.86 

Labor. 

228,026.00 

1.11 

2.18 

1.57 

Other costs. 

229,017.10 

.76 

2.29 

1.58 

Total. 

1,305,410.13 

7. 37 

13.98 

9.01 

Finished pulp— 

Wood. 

895,107.51 

4.26 

6.99 

5.56 

Labor. 

299,468.14 

1.55 

2. 29 

. 1.86 

Other costs. 

422.237.21 

2.01 

3.68 

2.63 

Total cost in bulk at works. 

1.616,812. 86 

8.96 

10.93 

10.05 

Slush and finished combined: 





Wood. 

1,743,474. 54 

4.26 

9.62 

5.70 

Manufacturing labor. 

527,494.14 

1.11 

2. 29 

1.73 

Other costs. 

651,254.31 

.76 

3.68 

2.13 

Total. 

2,922,222.99 

7.37 

13.98 

9.56 


1 For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage, data were secured for nun months only, and for mills 
having 23 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been raised 
to a 12-months basis. 


34 















































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


35 


Table 8.— Summary of the cost of manufacture of ground-wood pulp, sulphite fiber, and 
news-print paper, showing total cost, highest, lowest, and average cost per ton of product , 
by specified items of cost for mills in Canada reporting data —Continued. 


Items. 

Total cost. 

Range of cost per 
ton of products. 

Average. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Sulphite fiber: 2 

Wood. 

$991,566.18 
242,986.21 
765,308.12 

$11.75 
1.86 
8. 47 

$19. 66 
4.71 
12.23 

$13.13 
3.21 
10.13 

Labor. 

Other costs. 

Total cost in bulk at works. 

1,999,860.51 

24.02 

33.84 

26.47 

News-print paper: 2 

Materials— 

Ground-wood pulp. 

1,354,044.98 
1,180,688.88 
157,170.27 

6.16 

5.28 

.61 

9.93 

9.29 

4.03 

8.49 
7.41 
.99 

Sulphite pulp_*.. 

Other materials. 

Total materials. 

2,691,904.12 
508,387.75 
1,189,275.31 

13.10 
2.72 
6.31 

19.55 
3.59 
9.46 

16.89 
3.19 
7. 45 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs...“. 

Total cost in bulk at works. 

4,389,567.18 

24.97 

30.18 

27.53 



i For mills having 45 per cent of the total tonnage, data were secured for nine months only. These mills 
have been raised to a 12-months basis. 

J For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage, data were secured for nine months only, and for mills 
having 13 per cent of the total tonnage, data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been 
raised to a 12-months basis. 


Table 9. —Cost of production of ground-wood pulp, sulphite fiber, and news-print paper 
in Canada, by classified rates of cost per ton for mills reporting data. 


Cost per ton. 

Number 
of estab¬ 
lish¬ 
ments. 

Total tons 
produced. 

Per cent 
of total 
tons pro¬ 
duced. 

Average 
cost per 
tons pro¬ 
duced. 

Ground wood: 1 

Slush pulp- 

17 and under $9. 

2 

52,116.0 
68,904.0 
21,420.0 

36.0 

$7.65 
9.54 

$9 and under $10. 

2 

47.6 

$10 and under $12. 

1 

14.8 

10.04 

$12 and under $14. 

1 

2,446.7 

1.7 

13.98 



Total. 

6 

144,886.7 

100.0 

, . 

9.01 

Finished pulp- 

87 and under $9. 

1 

26,248.0 
36,720.0 
97,844. 7 

16.3 

8.96 

$9 and under $10. 

3 

22.8 

9.44 

$10 and under $12. 

3 

60.9 

10.58 




Total. 

7 

160,812.7 

100.0 

10.05 

Slush and finished pulp- 

87 and under $9. 


3 

78,364.0 
105,624.0 
119,264.7 

25.6 

8.08 

$9 and under $10. 

5 

34.6 

9.51 

$10 and under $12. 

4 

39.0 

10.48 

$12 or over. 

1 

2,446.7 

.8 

13.98 



Total.t. 

13 

305,699.4 

100.0 

9.56 



Sulphite pulp: 2 

$24 and under $26. 

3 

41,596.0 

55.0 

24. 54 

$26 and under $30. 

1 

27,821.0 

6,171.0 

36.8 

27.69 

$32 and under $34. 

1 

8.2 

33.84 





Total. 

5 

75,588.0 

100.0 

26.47 





News-print paper: 2 

Tinder $25. 

1 

6,962.4 
123,935.3 

4. 4 

24.97 

$25 and under $30. 

5 

77.7 

27.06 

$30 or over. 

1 

28, 539. 9 

17.9 

30.18 





Total .„. 

7 

159,437.6 

100.0 

27.53 






1 For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for 9 months only, and for mills having 

23 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been raised to a 
12-month basis. , , 

2 For mills having 45 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for 9 months only. These mills have 
been raised to a 12-month basis. 

2 For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for 9 months only, and for mills having 
13 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been raised to a 
12-month basis. 





































































































36 PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 10 .—Manufacturing labor cost per ton of ground-wood pulp, sulphite fiber, and 
news-print paper, by classified rates for mills in Canada reporting data. 


Labor cost per ton of product. 

Number 
of estab¬ 
lish¬ 
ments. 

Tons pro¬ 
duced. 

Per cent 
of total 
tons pro¬ 
duced. 

Average 
cost per 
ton. 

Ground-wood pulp: 1 

Slush pulp— 

$1 and under $1.50. 

2 

71,616.0 

49.4 

$1.33 

$1.50 and under $2. 

3 

70,824.0 
2,446.7 

48.9 

1.80 

$2 and under $2.50. 

1 

1.7 

2.18 




Total. 

6 

144,886.7 

100.0 

1.57 




Finished pulp— 

$1.50 and under $2. 

4 

81.069.0 

50.4 

1.62 

$2 and under $2.50. 

3 

79,743.7 

49.6 

2.11 





Total. 

7 

160,812.7 

100.0 

1.86 



Slush and finished combined— 

$1 and under $1.50... . 

2 

71.616.0 

23.4 

1.33 

$1.50 and under $2. 

7 

151,893.0 
82,190. 4 

49.7 

1.70 

$2 and under $2.50. 

4 

26.9 

2.11 




Total. 

13 

305,699. 4 

100.0 

1.73 


Sulphite fiber: 1 2 

Under $2.50. 

1 

6,250. 0 
24,636.0 
38,531.0 
6,171.0 

8.3 

1.86 

$2.50 and under $3. 

1 

32.6 

2.92 

$3 and under $3.50. 

2 

51.0 

3.38 

$4.50 and under $5. 

1 

8.1 

4. 71 


Total. 

5 

75.588. 0 

100.0 

3.21 



News-print paper: 3 

Under $3. 

5 

87,185. 6 
15,000.0 
57,252.0 

54.7 

2. 95 

$3 and under $3.50 

1 

9. 4 

3.04 

$3.50 and under $4. 

1 

35.9 

3.59 



Total. 

7 

159,437. 6 

100.0 

3.19 




1 For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for 9 months only, and for mills having 
23 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been raised to a 
12-month basis. 

2 For mills having 45 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for 9 months only. These mills have 
been raised to a 12-month basis. 

2 For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for 9 months only, and for mills having 
13 per cent of the total tonnage data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been raised to a 
12-month basis. 


COST OF PRODUCTION OF GROUND-WOOD PULP IN CANADA. 

In the discussion of costs which follows, the total costs aside from 
material have been termed conversion costs, though the minor items 
of taxes and insurance, which are not strictly conversion costs, are 
included under this heading. 

In Canada the distinction between slushed and finished pulp is so 
important that the data have been segregated upon this basis. Slush 
pulp is used whore made, and can not be exported or sold as such. 
Hence, for purposes of ascertaining and comparing the cost of Cana¬ 
dian pulp as a marketable commodity, purchasable in this country, 
with domestic pulp, it is necessaiy to consider finished pulp as a 
separate proposition. 

The tables show that 160,812.7 tons of finished, marketable pulp 
were produced in seven establishments at a total cost of $1,616,812.86, 
or an average of $10.05 per ton, though 60.9 per cent of it was pro¬ 
duced at an average cost of $10.58 per ton and 16.3 per cent at the 
lowest cost of $8.96. Slushed pulp for use in the mills where made 













































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


37 


was produced at an average of $9.01, or $1.04 per ton less on the 
average than finished pulp. Talcing all ground-wood pulp produced, 
we have a tonnage of 305,099.4, at a total average cost of $9.56 
per ton, with a highest total cost of $13.98 and a lowest of $7.37. 
The lowest cost for wood per ton of pulp was $4.26 and the highest 
$9.62, with an average of $5.70, making the total conversion costs only 
for ground-wood pulp in Canada $3.86 per ton, as against $4.36 in the 
United States. The significance of the range in total cost is brought 
out in Table 9, which shows 25.6 per cent produced at an average of 
$8.08, 34.6 per cent at an average of $9.51, while 39 per cent, or 
119,264.7 tons, were produced at an average total cost of $10.48. 

The cost of manufacturing labor was, when averaged over the whole 
production, $1.73 per ton of pulp, the range being from $1.11 to $2.29. 
Two plants produced 23.4 per cent of the reported tonnage at an 
average manufacturing labor cost of $1.33 per ton, seven establish¬ 
ments produced 49.7 per cent at an average of $1.70, while four estab¬ 
lishments produced 26.9 per cent at an average of $2.11. The highest 
group was, therefore, 7 cents lower in their manufacturing labor cost 
than the average for all mills in the United States. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF SULPHITE FIBER IN CANADA. 

The tables of cost of sulphite pulp in Canada cover a production of 
75,588 tons, manufactured at a total cost of $1,999,860.51, or an aver¬ 
age of $26.47 per ton. The lowest cost is $24.02 and the highest 
$33.84. The volume of production at the highest rate is small, being 
6,171 tons, or 8.2 per cent of the total tonnage reported, while 55 per 
cent of the reported production is at an average of $24.54, and 36.8 
per cent was produced at an average of $27.69. The cost of the wood 
as a raw material was $13.13 per ton of pulp on the average, with a 
lowest and highest ranging from $11.75 to $19.66 per ton. Deducting 
the wood, there remains $13.44 as the cost of conversion, if sulphur, 
which is a conversion material, be included. On the same basis, 
deducting wood, the conversion cost in the United States on the aver¬ 
age is $13.41, or 3 cents per ton less than in Canada, although the 
average manufacturing labor cost shows 63 cents per ton higher in 
the United States than in Canada. 

The manufacturing labor cost in sulphite ranges from $1.86 to $4.71 

E er ton, with an average of $3.21. One plant operates at the lowest la- 
or cost and it produces 8.3 per cent of the reported tonnage. Fifty- 
one per cent is produced at an average of $3.38 per ton for manufac¬ 
turing labor, while 8.1 per cent is produced at the highest reported 
cost of $4.71. 

COST OF PRODUCTION OF NEWS-PRINT PAPER IN CANADA. 

The seven news-print paper establishments from which reports 
were secured produced 159,437.6 tons of news-print paper at a 
cost of $4,389,567.18, or an average of $27.53 per ton. The range 
is from $24.97 as lowest, to $30.18 as highest cost. A very small 
percentage—4.4 per cent—was produced at the lowest cost, while 
17.9 per cent was produced at the highest, leaving five establish¬ 
ments, producing 123,935.3 tons, or 77.7 per cent, at an average 


38 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


of $27.06. Stock materials averaged $16.89 per ton, leaving $10.65 
as the conversion cost for paper in Canada as against $10.14 as a 
total conversion cost of paper (excluding stock materials) in the 
United States, on the average a difference of 51 cents per ton in 
favor of the United States. The cost of stock materials in the 
United States averaged $22.74 per ton of paper for all mills report¬ 
ing, a difference of $5.85 per ton of paper in favor of Canadian mills. 

Manufacturing labor costs range from $2.72 to $3.59 per ton of 
paper, with an average for the whole of $3.19. Five establishments, 
producing 54.7 per cent of the tonnage, did so at an average cost 
for manufacturing labor of $2.95, while 35.9 per cent of the tonnage 
carried a manufacturing labor cost of $3.59. 



Part Y. 


COMPARISON OF COSTS IN THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA. 

Coming now to the matter of comparison of costs for ground-wood 
pulp, sulphite fiber, and news-print paper between the United States 
and Canada, the elements of such costs are brought together in the 
following table: 

Table 11. —Summary of the cost of ground-wood pulp, sulphite fiber, and news-print 
paper, showing lowest, highest, and average cost per ton of product, by specified items 
of cost for mills, in the United States and Canada reporting data. 


Items. 


Ground-wood pulp: 

Wood. 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs. 

Total cost in bulk at works, 

Sulphite fiber: 

Wood. 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs. 

Total cost in bulk at works. 

News-print paper: 

Ground-wood pulp. 

Sulphite fiber. 

Other materials. 

Total materials. 

Manufacturing labor. 

Other costs. 

Total cost in bulk at works 


Lowest cost per 
ton of product. 


United 

States. 


§6.90 

.98 

.30 


9.80 


13.28 
2.09 
6.72 


24.47 


Canada. 


2 $4.26 
2 1.11 
2 .76 


2 7.37 


2 11.75 
3 1.86 
3 8.47 


3 24.02 


8.26 
6.45 
.32 


14. 64 


4 6.16 
4 5.28 
4 .61 


4 13.10 


2.19 

4.63 


24.50 


4 2.72 
4 6.31 


4 24.97 


Highest cost per 
ton of product. 


United 

States. 


§13.33 
5.90 
6.83 


21.32 


25.89 
6. 51 
14.68 


40.16 


18.54 
14.12 

3.25 


29.22 


7.26 
10.05 


43.00 


Canada. 


Average cost per 
ton of product. 


United 

States. 


Canada. 


2 $9.62 
2 2.29 
2 3.68 


§10.23 
2.18 
2.18 


2 $5.70 
2 1.73 
2 2.13 


2 13.98 


3 19. 66 
3 4.71 
3 12.23 


3 33.84 


14.59 


18.58 
3.84 
9.57 


31.99 


2 9.56 


3 13.13 
3 3.21 
3 10.13 


3 26. 47 


4 9.93 
4 9.29 
4 4.03 


13.27 
8.63 
.84 


4 19.55 


22.74 


4 3.59 
4 9.46 


3.27 

6.87 


4 30.18 


32.88 


4 8.49 
4 7. 41 
4 .99 


4 16.89 


4 3.19 
4 7.45 


4 27.53 


1 The present tables of highest and lowest cost per ton of product for the United States and Canada show 
certain apparent discrepancies as compared with the tables printed in the preliminary report. These 
discrepancies may need explanation. 

Where the lowest given in the present table is lower than that as previously published, or the highest 
figure in the present report is higher than that previously published, this is naturally accounted for by 
the inclusion in the present report of mills which had not been reported at the time of the previous publi¬ 
cation. 

In some cases, however, the figures as now printed give as the lowest a figure higher than the previous 
lowest, or a highest cost lower than the previous highest cost. This may be accounted for in various ways. 
For instance, in the column for news-print paper, the lowest cost per ton of paper now appears slightly 
higher for both ground-wood pulp and sulphite pulp in the United States, the reason being that in the 
new tabulation the figures were revised on an absolutely uniform basis, and in this particular case the 
company had charged all of its overhead expenses to the cost of the paper alone and none to its pulp plants. 
This overhead expense was distributed over the three plants, thus raising the amount for pulp and reducing 
the item of other costs on the paper. 

In the highest cost per ton of product for the United States in the case of ground-wood pulp, the former 
figure of §15.01 has been reduced to §13.33. This is accounted for by the fact that the report from the mill 
in question showed an amount of pulp entirely impossible in relation to the amount of wood charged in. 
In this case they were credited with an additional amount of pulp, thereby reducing the cost of wood per 
ton of pulp. 

Similar readjustments have been made in some cases for Canadian mills, which accounts for certain 
similar changes in the Canadian column. In the preliminary report, because of the fact that adequate time 
was not allowed for a minute examination of Canadian figures, some figures were included which for the 
extreme “high” and “low” needed careful revision. In one case there was an actual misprint. Under 
the head of “News-print paper” the lowest Canadian cost for sulphite pulp per ton of paper was given as 
§3.71. This appears correctly in the new table as $5.28. 

2 For mills having 2 per cent of the total tonnage, data were received for 9 months only. For mills having 
23 per cent of total tonnage, data were received for a shorter period. These mills have been raised to a 
12-months basis. 

3 For mills having 45 per cent of the total tonnage, data were secured for 9 months only. These mills 
have been raised to a 12-months basis. 

4 For mills having 2 per cent of total tonnage, data were secured for 9 months only. For mills having 
13 per cent of total tonnage, data were secured for a shorter period. These mills have been raised to a 
12-months basis. 

39 





















































40 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Some discussion of its findings lias been had incidental to the other 
Canadian tables, so that no more than a summary seems necessary 
here. Ignoring the highest and lowest, the significance of which can 
be determined by reference to the classified cost tables for both 
countries, the total average cost for the two countries present some 
interesting comparisons. The first thing that seems significant is 
that the difference in cost of wood per ton of pulp is practically the 
difference in the total cost. For instance, in ground-wood pulp the 
total cost is $14.59 for the United States and $9.56 for Canada, a 
difference of $5.03. The cost of the wood as raw material per ton of 
product is $10.23 for the United States and $5.70 for Canada, a dif¬ 
ference of $4.53, which deducted from the total difference of $5.03 
leaves a difference of 50 cents per ton in favor of Canada, 44 cents of 
this being in the item of manufacturing labor cost. 

The Canadian average cost for sulphite was $26.47, the average for 
the United States mills reporting was $31.99, a difference of $5.52, 
of which $5.45 is absorbed by the difference in cost of wood as a raw 
material, leaving a net difference of but 6 cents per ton, although the 
difference in labor cost is 63 cents per ton in favor of Canada. 

In news-print paper the effect of wood cost is not so clear, because 
here the raw material is pulp and not wood, but if we take 80 per cent 
of the difference we find in the wood cost in ground-wood pulp, and 
20 per cent of the difference in case of sulphite pulp, we have $4.71 
as the amount of the difference in the cost of news-print paper in the 
two countries, which is due to the difference in wood costs. 

The average cost of production of news print in Canada is $27.53 
per ton, in the United States $32.88. The difference is $5.35, of 
which $4.71 is accounted for by difference in cost of wood as raw 
material in the pulp, leaving a difference of 64 cents, only 8 cents of 
which is covered by the difference in manufacturing labor. 

Table 12 corresponds to Table 7, page 32, only as concerns news¬ 
print paper, giving the average cost for all mills by principal items 
of cost. The column showing the same facts for mills in the United 
States has been transferred to this table also for purposes of more 
minute comparison. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


41 


Table 12.— Average cost per ton of product for specified items entering into the cost of 
manufacture of news-print paper, for mills in Canada and the United States reporting 
data. 


Items. 

Average cost per 
ton of news-print 
paper. 


Canada. 

United 

States. 

Ground wood. 

$8. 49 
7.41 

1. 24 

$13. 27 
8.63 
.79 
.40 

Sulphite. 

Waste paper. 

Fillers. 

.40 

Other materials. 

.57 

.42 


Total materials. 

16. 89 

22. 74 

Manufacturing labor. 

3.19 

3. 27 
.82 

Felts. 

.79 

Wires. 

.33 

.36 

Screen plates. 

.03 

.05 

Belting. 

. 10 

. 12 

Lubricants. 

.08 

.08 

Coal. 

2.13 

1.81 

Wood. 

.16 

.52 

Finishing materials. 

1.50 

.86 

Other works expense.. 

.24 

.69 

W ater power.. *. 

.30 

1 .31 

Repair materials. 

.52 

.85 

Repair labor. 

.55 

.55 

Administration expense. 

.49 

.45 

Miscellaneous operating expense. 

.66 

.26 

Accident insurance. 

.03 

.03 

Fire insurance. 

.16 

.07 

Taxes. 

.09 

2 .26 



1 Includes electric power in three mills having 13 per cent of the total product. 

2 Mills with 38 per cent of total production report fire insurance, accident insurance, and taxes combined. 




































Part VI. 


INTERMEDIATE PROFITS AND COST OF WOOD. 

A bookkeeping practice quite general in recent years, and by no 
means confined to the pulp and paper industry, is to run each depart¬ 
ment of a plant or of a company as a separate entity and conduct it on 
a paying basis precisely as though it were a separate industry. Thus 
the pulp mill attached to a paper mill is run for a profit precisely as 
much as though it were run to manufacture pulp for the open market. 
Wood operations are conducted to show a profit to themselves, and 
the pulp mill pays the wood-land department either the market price 
or nearly that for its wood, charges the paper mill the market price for 
pulp, etc. In some instances even supplies are purchased by a store¬ 
room department, which resells to the mill at a profit. Subsidiary com¬ 
panies are operated to sell to the parent company. In one case a sub¬ 
sidiary was organized to take over the water power, and thereafter 
the pulp and paper company paid some $70,000 a year for water 
power that had formerly been considered a part of capital investment. 
This added $1.75 per ton to the book cost of pulp, while the paper mill 
also paid a tribute of 12 cents per ton to the water company in addi¬ 
tion to the increased cost of the pulp it used. In a few other cases 
electric power had been segregated and put under a subsidiary com¬ 
pany, which sold it at a profit to the pulp and paper mills. This gives 
to the finished product a cost which it would carry in the case of a 
separate paper mill buying all its pulps and materials in the open 
market; but it gives a cost of paper lined with a string of profits on 
materials to concerns producing their own material. 

The total of these profits on material in process can, of course, be 
deducted by a sufficiently careful study of the schedules, and this 
has been done for the vital processes. The difficulty in any general 
statement is that all manufacturers do not charge a profit on mate¬ 
rial in process, but put the pulp they themselves produce into the 
paper mill at its net cost; for instance, in the United States in the 
total of 940,478.1 tons of news-print paper covered by this report 
there were 482,967.4 tons, or 51.4 per cent, in which the ground- 
wood pulp made and used in the same plants was charged into the 
paper mills at a profit above the cost of manufacture. The average 
profit on the pulp so charged was $2.68 per ton of pulp, and this 
made a ground-wood profit of $1.74 per ton of paper produced, 
which will here be designated as a ‘‘profit cost,” or cost which 
results from profits on material in stages of process. On the other 
hand, 349,877.7 tons of paper, or 37.2 per cent of the paper reported, 
carried a profit on the sulphite pulp made and used in the same plant. 
The average of the profit of sulphite pulp so charged was $2.23 per 
ton of pulp, resulting in 65 cents per ton of paper. 

42 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


43 


It is manifestly unfair to average these pulp profits over all of 
the paper production, since the cost of only 37.2 per cent of the 
reported output is enhanced by profits on transfer of sulphite pulp, 
and 51.4 per cent is enhanced by profits on transfer of ground wood 
pulp, while nearly half of paper produced does not carry a cost so 
enhanced. 

On the other hand, companies which do not charge a profit on 
material in process in the same establishment do charge where the 
pulp mills are entirely distinct and at a distance from the paper mill 
consuming the pulp. One of the largest concerns, for instance, ch arges 
ground-wood pulp shipped from mill to mill at a uniform flat price of 
$17 per ton, the purchasing mill to pay the freight cost of the transfer. 
To some pulp mills this is a profit, to some an actual loss. The 
profit on ground wood transfers for 1909 for the company in con¬ 
sideration was $60,000, on a transfer of 106,000 tons of pulp, or 
less than 60 cents per ton of pulp so transferred. This would mean 
a pulp wood profit of 48 cents per ton of such paper as was made from 
the pulp transfer, but this was only a trifle over one-third of the paper 
tonnage produced by the concern in question. To distribute it over 
all tonnage, even within the same corporation, would be to apply to 
66 per cent of its product a cost it does not carry and relieve 33 per 
cent of a “ profit cost’’ it does carry. The board has endeavored 
to locate rather than distribute this “profit cost,” believing that since 
it is not general it should not be anywhere considered as such. 

In Canada in 54.4 per cent of the total tonnage of news-print paper 
reported, the ground wood pulp was charged into the paper mills 
at a profit above the cost of manufacture. The average profit per 
ton of ground wood pulp so charged was $1.90 and the “ profit cost” 
per ton of paper was $1.52. In 36.3 per cent of the total tonnage of 
Canadian news-print paper reported, the sulphite pulp was charged 
into the paper mills at a profit above the cost of manufacture. The 
average profit per ton of sulphite pulp was $3.98 and the profit cost 
per ton of paper was 79 cents. 

WOOD PROFIT AND STUMPAGE IN GROUND-WOOD PULP. 

Most of the manufacturers of pulp and paper have protected their 
supply of raw material by more or less extensive investments in 
woodlands. As a rule the woodland account is credited with a 
“stumpage” or price per cord for the standing trees, in the price 
charged to the pulp mills. Not all concerns, however, put a stump- 
age charge into the price of the wood so charged. “ Stump age” was 
charged into the cost of the wood that produced 572,561 tons out of 
the 725,254 tons of ground-wood pulp covered by the report. In 
other words, 78.9 per cent of the ground-wood pulp carries a stump- 
age profit. The lowest stumpage cost per ton of ground-wood pulp 
was $0.51 on 6,003 tons of pulp; the highest stumpage cost was $2.48 
on 38,499 tons; the average stumpage on the 572,561 tons which 
carried stumpage cost was $1.16 per ton. 

In addition to stumpage charge, which is, as stated, simply setting 
a value on the standing wood, there were a number of companies and 
firms which made a profit on woodland operations as such; that is, 
a profit on the cost of getting the wood from the forest t© the mill. 


44 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Of the 725,254 tons of ground-wood pulp covered by the schedules 
secured 494,689 tons, or 68.2 per cent, carried a profit cost on wood¬ 
lands operation over and above stumpage. The highest profit so 
charged was $1.96 per ton of pulp. This, however, affected but 
8,532 tons; the lowest was $0.12, carried by 22,264 tons; the aver¬ 
age profit cost carried by the entire 494,689 tons affected was $1.10 
per ton. 


WOOD PROFIT AND STUMPAGE IN SULPHITE PULP. 

The foregoing statement deals solely with ground-wood or mechan¬ 
ical pulp. The same conditions exist in the case of the wood used 
for sulphite pulp. 

The schedules secured from 25 sulphite mills in the United States 
carried a total production of 441,459 tons; of this 339,787 tons carried 
a stumpage charge on the wood used in its production. The average 
stumpage was $2.13 per ton of sulphite pulp, the range being from 
$0.99 as the lowest to $4.93 for the highest. The lowest figure 
applies to 12,638 tons; the highest to 17,422 tons. 

A profit on woodland operations, in excess of or other than the 
amount charged as stumpage, was carried by 177,801 tons out of the 
441,459 tons of sulphite reported. That is, 40.2 per cent of the 
tonnage carried a “profit cost” in the wood used for its production, 
the lowest being $0.39, on 9,425 tons, and the highest $2.76, on 
125,023 tons, the average of such profit cost carried by the 177,801 
tons being $2.14 per ton. 

Profit here must be understood to mean not only profit above 
stumpage on lands owned by the paper company, or a subsidiary, but 
also the profits on a large amount of wood bought in the open market 
either by the firm direct or more often by a subsidiary company and 
resold to the parent company or to the pulp mill at a profit on the 
original purchase price. 

LOGGING OPERATIONS AND PULP WOOD COSTS. 

Below is given a table summarizing the examination of the board 
into logging operations in connection with wood costs to pulp mills. 
These figures have been carefully compiled from the detailed cost 
records of woodland operations. As may be seen from a footnote 
below (p. 46), exact comparison is very difficult on account not only 
of the division of wood into rough, peeled, and rossed, but also on 
account of the variations as to the amount of wood in a cord and the 
number of pounds of wood to a ton of pulp. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


45 


Table 13 . Lowest, highest, and average price (per cord), stumpage (per cord), and 
profit (per cord) of rough, peeled, and rossed wood purchased and cut from lands ovjned 
by mills, for ground-wood and sulphite mills in the United States reporting data. 


GROUND-WOOD MILLS. 



Cords used. 

Price per 
cord at 
mill. 

Stump- 
age per 
cord. 

Profit 
per cord. 

Purchased wood. 





Rough: 





Lowest. 

1 3,999 

$6 00 


None 

Highest. 

2 3,507 

9 25 


$1 05 

Average. 

3 81,988 

6. 87 


.04 

Peeled: 


Lowest. 

1 2,904 

9 91 


None 

Highest. 

2 9,848 

10 09 


1 50 

Average. 

312,752 

9.96 


1.16 

Rossed: 


Lowest. 

1 5,715 

9 03 


None 

Highest. 

2 6,029 

15.01 


2 00 

Average. 

3 221,934 

11.50 


1.50 

Wood cut from own land. 


Rough: 





Lowest. 

i 46,690 

7. 38 

None. 

None. 

Highest.'. 

2 6,174 

8. 84 

•12.00 

1.46 

Average. 

3154,820 

7. 65 

1.47 


Peeled: 




06 

Lowest. 

i 5,934 

8.01 

None. 

None. 

Highest. 

2 14,386 

11.37 

2.85 

.44 

Average. 

3 67,839 

9. 96 

2.02 

.09 

Rossed: 





Lowest. 

i 106,861 

11.29 

None. 

.13 

Highest. 

2 20,309 

14.00 

2.50 

1.46 

Average. 

» 

3141,250 

11.68 

2.13 

1.27 


SULPHITE MILLS. 


Purchased wood. 





Rough: 





Lowest. 

i 59,801 

$4. 82 


None. 

Highest. 

2 38,761 

7.82 


$0.75 

Average. 

3193,394 

6.29 


.16 

Peeled: 




Lowest. 

1 10,173 

7.89 


None. 

Highest. 

2 18^ 293 

10.35 


.20 

Average. 

3 28,466 

9.47 


.13 

Rossed: 




Lowest. 

i 19,851 

10. 75 


None. 

Highest. 

2 5,556 

11.55 


1.46 

Average. 

3143.471 

10. 99 


1.44 

Wood cut from own land. 





Rough: 





Lowest. 

i 21,036 

7.70 

None. 

None. 

Highest. 

2 11,007 

9.40 

$2. 00 

None. 

Average. 

3 80,951 

7.95 

1.30 

None. 

Peeled: 





Lowest. 

i 30,124 

9.52 

1.00 

None. 

Highest. 

2 19,790 

10.56 

2.85 

None. 

Average. 

3 266,905 

9. 87 

1.30 

None. 

Rossed: 





Lowest. 

i 106,861 

11.29 

.85 

None. 

Highest. 

2 16,793 

12.00 

2.065 

None. 

Average. 

3 127,246 

11.42 

1.84 

None. 


1 Number of cords at lowest price per cord. 

2 Number of cords at highest price per cord. 

s Total number of cords on w T hich average is based. 



















































































46 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


CORDS OF PULP WOOD USED IN CANADIAN MILLS. 

The number of cords of pulp wood used in Canada during the 
year 1909, together with its average value per cord 1 at the mill 
and the number of tons of ground wood, sulphite, sulphate, and 
soda pulps manufactured from it in Canada, have been ascertained 
by the forestry branch of the Dominion Government for all but 
about 10 mills, and the results are presented in its Bulletin No. 12, 
from which the following has been compiled: 


1 An order in council of the government of the Province of Quebec, dated Apr. 26, 1910, for the regula¬ 
tion of licenses to cut timber from the Crown woods and forests, reaffirmed the previous order fixing the 
contents of a cord of wood as follows: 

“ For the purpose of applying the present tariff to cord wood, the English cord of 128 cubic feet is equiv¬ 
alent to 600 feet b. m. for rough or unbarked wood and to 700 feet b. m. for rossed or peeled wood.” 

It has been ascertained, however, that there has never been any scientific or accurate basis used in fix¬ 
ing the equivalent of the cord of 128 cubic feet at 600 feet b. m. for rough or unbarked wood. A number 
of Canadian and American manufacturers have made practical tests for the purpose of establishing the 
number of feet in a cord of rough spruce pulp wood. The tests in widely separated concerns showed that 
a cord of 128 cubic feet contained not to exceed 500 feet b. m. 

In some establishments the tests gave from 450 to 471 feet per cord. 

As many manufacturers of ground wood pulp and sulphite in the United States and Canada charge 
into their cost sheets the rough wood they use on the basis of 600 feet per cord, it will be seen that in all such 
cases they have the benefit of 100 feet per cord and a fictitious increase in the cost of wood to that extent. 
As the logs from which the pulp wood is made are cut, driven, boomed, and measured on the basis of the 
number of feet board measure they contained, it is interesting to find that there is no such tihing as a 
uniform log rule used for the purpose of measurement in Canada or the United States. 

In the Canadiau Forestry Journal for December, 1910, is an article by A. H. D. Ross, M. A., M. F., lec¬ 
turer in the faculty of forestry in the University of Toronto, urging the forestry association to consider 
the possibility of a uniform log rule for all Canada. He says: 

“Up to the present time no less than 54 different rules have been devised for the purpose of estimating 
the contents of logs of given diameters and lengths. Some 46 of these may be described as board measure 
rule and the remaining 8 as volume rules. The board measure rules profess to give the number of board 
feet of inch lumber that may be sawn from logs of given dimensions and the volume rules give a more or 
less accurate estimate of the cubic contents of the logs. * * * Of the 46 board rpeasure rules, 17 may 
be described as formula rules, 17 as diagram rules, 8 as mill tallies, and 4 combination rules. * * * 
With such a welter of rules—many of which are grossly inaccurate and no two of which agree—is it any 
wonder that there is a widespread desire for the adoption of a universal standard of measurement?” 

Inasmuch as the comparative cost of news-print paper and pulp in the United States and Canada is 
governed almost entirely by the cost in each country of the cord of wood, it would seem to be of the greatest 
importance that an accurate knowledge of the volume of wood inside the bark should be known, but 
excepting in those establishments which have made accurate tests, the actual contents are not known. 
Then, too, the quantity of wood in a cord differs on account of different dimensions. In a paper read 
by Herbert N. Price, president Province of Quebec Pulp Wood Association, before the Canadian For¬ 
estry Convention at Ottawa in 1906, he said: 

“ There is no doubt but that a smaller diameter of wood has been cut than is in the true interests of the 
pulp and paper mill to accept or the owner of the private lands or limits to cut. Some 12 years since the 
diameter shipped (to the United States) was 6 inches and up, while now 4 inches and up is accepted. The 
actual quantity of wood is less in a cord of 4 inches and up than in 6 inches and up, but competition between 
buyers have brought about this lower minimum. * * * Pulp wood is divided into rough wood, peeled 
wood, hand-shaved wood, and rossed wood. Rough wood is made generally in the winter in whatever 
engths are most convenient, being cut down to 4 feet before being shipped to the United States and to 2 
eet. If trees are cut after winter sets in, they can be hand peeled to advantage the following spring, as the 
sap will then run. Peeled wood is peeled in the woods in June, July, and August and mostly cut in 4-foot 
lengths and hauled out the following winter or driven the following spring. Hand-peeled wood is generally 
peeled with a drawknife the following spring and summer, after being made rough in the woods and after 
being either hauled, cut, or driven. The later in the summer it is so hand peeled the harder the work is. 
Rossed wood is the rough wood machine-peeled by a barker or rosser. The loss of wood in this case is 
greater than when it is hand peeled and may be estimated at from 20 to 30 per cent, according to the size 
and quality. The smaller the diameter of the wood, the greater the waste or loss. The number of pieces 
in a cord varies greatly according to the size of the wood cut, but from actual measurement a cord averaging 
4f inches in diameter takes 174 pieces; 5i inches, 122 pieces; 6i inches, 100 pieces; and 7^ inches, 82 pieces, 
showing the extra labor and handling in cutting small wood. In shipping wood by rail it is found that a 
cord of wood peeled in summer and shipped the following winter or spring weighs about 3,800 pounds per 
cord. 

“The values of spruce pulp wood have gone up greatly during the past 10 years and especially within the 
last 5 years (prior to 1906). Rough wood that sold at $2.50 a cord, 6 inches and up, in 1892, sold in 1904 at 
$4.50 for 4 inches. The Quebec Government stumpage of 65 cents per cord, 600 feet b. m., is equal to 91 
cents per 1,000 feet.” 



PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


47 


Table 14. —Number of cords of wood used, average value per cord, and number of tons of 

pulp produced in Canadian mills in 1909. 

[Data for 10 mills were not received.] 


Provinces. 

Cords of 
wood 
used. 

Average 
value per 
cord. 

Tons of 
pulp pro¬ 
duced. 

Quebec. 

319,935 
187,352 
88,450 
25,076 
1,316 

15.83 
5. 72 
4.69 

4.07 
7.44 

238,286 
132,491 
49,991 
23,996 
644 

Ontario. 

New Brunswick. 

Nova Scotia. 

British Columbia.•. 

Total. 

622,129 

5.57 

445,408 



Five hundred and sixteen thousand and thirty cords, or 82.9 per cent, was spruce and 100,095 cords, or 
16.1 per cent, was balsam, the two woods being 99 per cent of all the wood used. 

During the year the mills investigated by the board got out or 
purchased for their own use 476,278 cords of rough pulp wood at an 
average cost of $5.76 per cord. Most of this was landed at the mills in 
the log drive by water ; but some had been transported by rail to the 
plant. 

In the production of the output reported, 395,127 cords of rough 
wood were used. 

The following table shows the number of cords at each of the range 
of costs per cord. 

This table also shows that 77.3 per cent of all the wood used cost 
less than $6 per cord. 


Table 15. —Costs of rough spruce wood at Canadian mills. 


Range of costs per cord. 

Cords. 

Per cent 
of total. 

Less than $5 per cord. 

10,080 
•295,153 
66,375 

2.5 

74.8 

16.8 

$5 and over but. under 86 . 

86 and over but. under 87 _ . 

87 and nver but. under 88 . 

88 and nver but under 89 . 

i 21,927 

5.5 

8Q and nver but. under 810 . 

810 and nver but. under XII _ . 

2 1,592 

0.4 

Tnt.al . 

395,127 

100.0 



1 Include wood shipped by rail. 


2 Rossed wood. 





































Part VII. 


POUNDS OF MATERIAL PER TON OF NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 

Stock material in news-print paper consists of ground-wood pulp, 
sulphite fiber, clay, alum, sizing, color, and occasionally waste paper. 
The principal stock materials are, of course, the pulps, and in the 
table which will follow these are shown separately, all other materials 
are included in the total but are not itemized. Where waste paper 
was purchased from the outside it was considered in the cost of 
material and included in pounds of material used. In some cases 
the waste paper was not an expense and hence was ignored. In the 
few cases where the total weight of materials used is less than a ton, 
there has been bad estimating of the amount of pulp used by the 
firm, or there has been an unscheduled amount of waste paper used, 
or both, and this is also true where the total material is less than 
or only slightly over 2,000 pounds per ton of product, as in establish¬ 
ment 1. 

The proportion of sulphite fiber to ground-wood pulp, or to total 
ingredients, will be seen to vary greatly, and this is true in practice, 
for where the mechanical or ground-wood pulp is of a poor quality it 
requires more sulphite pulp to bind or “mat” it. Mechanical pulps 
bought on the market are not as a rule so carefully ground nor so 
closely screened as pulps made by a concern for its own use, and hence 
more sulphite pulp is required. During the past two or three years 
the water supply on most of our rivers has been very unsatisfactory, 
most American paper mills have been forced to buy pulp, or at least 
make an inferior pulp themselves, and the use of sulphite fiber has 
been correspondingly large. To illustrate, one paper manufacturer 
stated that when water was plenty he could, by using high-grade 
sulphite and screening his ground-wood pulp thoroughly, make a 
good paper with 13 per cent sulphite; while with purchased ground 
wood he had used 30 per cent sulphite to get an equally good paper. 
The figures show that the average used during last year was prac¬ 
tically 25 per cent, whereas 20 per cent is the usually estimated pro¬ 
portion. The average ground-wood pulp used per ton of news-print 
paper produced in the 38 mills in the United States was 1,573.8 
pounds, the average of sulphite pulp 507 pounds, the total average of 
material per ton of paper was 2,199.8. In Canada the average for 7 
mills was 1,565 pounds of ground wood, 506 pounds of sulphite fiber, 
and a total average of all material of 2,141 pounds per ton of paper. 

POUNDS OF MATERIAL IN FINISHED PRODUCT. 

To understand the illusiveness of this problem, it should be stated 
that while wood is bought on some fairly specific basis of measure¬ 
ment and the number of cords in the wood pile is known with some 
accuracy, the wood is not measured regularly into the wood room, but 
48 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


49 


only estimated—estimated with care, to be sure, but nevertheless 
estimated. The wood when barked is transformed into pulp by going 
through the grinders, or in case of sulphite pulp, through the digesters. 

In most cases the pulp is carried in a flood of water to the screens, 
thence to the “ stuff chests," or storage vats, from there to the paper 
machines, always in a flowing slush of water and pulp. It is not 
weighed into the paper-making machines; it is never possible under 
any circumstances to do so. When pulp is run through wet machines 
and packed for shipment or sale, it is never dry, nor more than 65 per 
cent dry; usually pulp is shipped and sold 50 per cent wet. 

Nevertheless, in all estimates of production and of use, pulp is con¬ 
sidered on an air-dry basis—that is to say, on the basis of “bone dry,” 
plus 10 per cent. This assumes all of the moisture out of it as “bone 
dry ”; then 10 per cent is added as the amount of moisture it would 
absorb from the atmosphere. All pulps and papers are figured on 
tins basis. In other words, these weights are carried on the books, 
and all computations are made on pulp and paper in a condition in 
which the pulp is never actually found. 

In no case where a rough cord of wood is estimated to produce 1,600 
or 1,800 pounds of air-drv pulp is the cord of wood measured into the 
grinders and the pulp caught and rendered air-dry and weighed. 
Nowhere in the industry is there any such weighing in and weighing 
out as there is in the iron and steel industry, for instance. The pulp 
can not be weighed onto the Fourdrinier, either air-dry or in any other 
condition, and yet an estimate is made of the amount of pulp “air- 
dry” which is running onto the machine. These estimates are 
honestly made, based on the experience of the manufacturer, as a 
means of getting as nearly as possible at his cost of production. 

Secondly, this pul]) is figured on an air-dry basis, which is, as 
before stated, bone-dry plus 10 per cent. The paper is actually 
weighed off the machine. By the time this pulp runs over 25 or 30 
hot steel rollers, it is more than air-dry; it is nearly bone-dry. Hence 
to say that 111 pounds of material figured as air-dry shows a waste 
or loss of stock of 11 pounds per hundred is incorrect, because the 10 
per cent difference between the air-dry estimate of pulp weight and 
the almost bone-dry weight of finished paper absorbs most of the 11 
pounds and renders the actual stock loss comparatively little. Of 
course, in some instances there is a good deal more than 11 pounds, 
and in these cases there is either bad estimating on the pulp actually 
used or there is excessive stock loss. 

STOCK LOSS. 

So far as stock loss in this country is concerned, certain facts are to 
be considered. The difference between the air-dry pulp and the almost 
bone-dry paper has already been discussed. It remains to discuss the 
economy of such saving as has been suggested. The stock loss on 
sulphite pulp is comparatively nil—not over 1 or 2 per cent. The 
stock loss on ground-wood pulp consists of the fine powdery matter 
that has been so reduced by the grinders that no wires we use on 
paper machines will hold it while it “mats” with the other pulps. 
Being practically powdered it has no “matting” qualities. This 
o-oes off as “white water.” If this were distilled in “save-alls” the 

S. Doc. 31, 62-1-4 


50 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


result would be a wood flour which could only serve as a “filler/’ not 
as a real pulp. It would, in short, only effect a saving on clay and 
the other fillers. An equipment to save it costs money, the labor to 
operate the equipment is comparatively high-priced labor, and it 
might even result that the so-called waste if saved would cost more 
than the flller that it would displace and operate to increase the labor 
cost per ton of paper. The American rate of wages is so high that 
labor must be employed only on exceedingly productive lines. 
Sometimes it costs more to save waste materials than it does to lose 
them. To illustrate: In Norway and Sweden pyrites is used instead 
of sulphur in making sulphite pulp. The saving there on the Swedish 
wage basis is 25 per cent of the sulphur cost. Our sulphur cost in a 
ton of sulphite pulp is $3—25 per cent of this is 75 cents; one-fifth 
of a ton of sulphite pulp goes in a ton of paper, or 15 cents per ton of 
paper. But the original expense of pyrites burners is considerable, 
and the labor of burning it at the American rate of wages would so 
far exceed the Swedish that it is quite possible that to attempt to 
economize by using pyrites instead of sulphur would increase the cost 
of paper in the United States. It may be well to note, however, that 
in an estimate made for the board by a construction engineer whose 
business is principally that of building pulp and paper mills he calcu¬ 
lates a reduction of 30 cents per ton of news-print paper. This, how¬ 
ever, assumes easy access to pyrites supplies. His statement follows: 

The substitution of sulphur burning by the burning of pyrites would increase the 
cost of construction per ton of finished paper for a 50-ton news-print-paper mill about 
$400 per ton; a 100-ton news-print-paper mill about $300 per ton, and a 200-ton news¬ 
print-paper mill about $275 per ton. The advantage to be attained through the burn¬ 
ing of pyrites in place of sulphur is a reduction in the cost of the manufacture of the 
sulphite pulp, safely $1.50 per ton of production, showing on the ton of news-print 
paper a saving of one-fifth of $1.50, or 30 cents per ton. 

The statement of the saving in Swedish mills was made to the 
board by a Swedish paper manufacturer visiting America, and the 
statement was very positive that the saving was 25 per cent. Only 
one sulphite mill has tried to install pyrites burners, so far as known, 
and in this case the experiment was abandoned. 

Some stock losses we undoubtedly have, some wastefulness of mate¬ 
rials that could be saved. Some of the most advanced manufac¬ 
turers are attempting to improve their plants in this regard, but in 
view of the high cost of equipment and labor it is still a question 
whether or not this will prove a genuine economy. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


51 


Table 16. — Pounds of ground wood pulp , of sulphite fiber, and of all materials used per 
ton of news-print paper in mills in the United States and Canada , by mills. 

UNITED STATES. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 

6 

7 

8 
9 

10 

11 

12 

13 

14 

15 

16 

17 

18 

19 

20 


Material per ton of news-print 
paper. 

Mill No. 

Material per ton of news-print 
paper. 

Ground 

wood. 

Sulphite. 

All ma¬ 
terials. 

Ground 

wood. 

Sulphite. 

All ma¬ 
terials. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 


Pounds. 

Pounds. 

Pounds. 

1,520 

381 

2,002 

21. 

1,700 

498 

2,232 

1,384 

640 

2,117 

22. 

1,492 

382 

2,104 

1,572 

630 

2,311 

23. 

1,480 

407 

1,990 

1,586 

532 

2,241 

24. 

1,684 

316 

2,118 

1,649 

502 

2,203 

25. 

1,768 

400 

2,196 

1,582 

490 

2,181 

26. 

1,526 

643 

2,235 

1,536 

668 

2, 233 

27. 

1,620 

493 

2,264 

1,476 

525 

2,251 

28. 

1,616 

431 

2,176 

1,664 

576 

2,387 

29. 

1,601 

442 

2,177 

1,409 

450 

2,195 

30. 

1,530 

459 

2,132 

1,592 

551 

2,224 

31. 

1,589 

387 

2,093 

1,562 

521 

2,184 

32. 

1,658 

468 

2,275 

1,587 

449 

2,136 

33. 

1,472 

406 

2.060 

1,612 

479 

2,193 

34. 

1,614 

359 

2,106 

1,246 

954 

2,270 

35. 

1,784 

415 

2,343 

1,718 

442 

2,248 

36. 

1,623 

463 

2,233 

1,317 

448 

1,996 

37. 

1,514 

519 

2,193 

1,453 

434 

1,966 

38. 

1,661 

462 

2,248 

1,565 

435 

2,062 





1,795 

447 

2,249 

Average. 

1,573.8 

507 

2,199. 8 


CANADA. 


1 

2 

3 

4 

5 


1,567 

530 

2,192 

6. 

1,672 

453 

2,172 

1,405 

304 

2,141 

7. 

1,622 

416 

2,119 

1,568 

549 

2,190 





1,598 

488 

2,165 

Average. 

1,565 

506 

2,141 

1,538 

534 

2,116 























































































Part VIII. 




EFFICIENCY OF EQUIPMENT IN PAPER MILLS IN THE UNITED 

STATES AND CANADA. 

That labor efficiency and labor cost per ton of product are almost 
entirely dependent upon equipment is evidenced by the following 
table, which deals with Fourdrinier paper machine cost only. It 
will be understood that the liquid pulp runs from the mixing vats, 
or from the “stuff chests,” upon the wires of the Fourdrinier where it 
is “matted” and carried in continuous sheet over the felts through 
the machine to the reels, where it is wound on a roll as finished paper. 
The employees who operate these machines are the highly skilled 
labor in a paper mill. It is these paper machines (called Fourdri- 
nier’s from the name of the man who patented their general idea) 
which control the final question of efficiency of equipment. In the 
following table 14 machines are taken from three plants, include all 
machines in these plants and represent practically all types of machines 
in use. Efficiency is studied on the basis of the speed and capacity 
of machines, the tonnage capacity of the machines in 24 hours, and 
the number of men required to man the machine; from this is derived 
the total one-man hours on each machine each day (of 24 hours) 
and the time cost in one-man hours per ton of product, and finally 
the machine labor cost per ton of paper produced. It will be seen 
that the time cost ranges from 2.64 hours of labor per ton to 6.3 
hours—one-man time; the money cost from 82 cents to $1.84 per 
ton, and in the same plant the cost is as high as $1.84 per ton on one 
machine and as low as 98 cents on another. It is the difference 
between this newer equipment and higher labor efficiency and lower 
cost, or on the contrary, old and slow machines and high cost, that 
spells profits or loss in the paper business. 


Table 17. —Efficiency of labor by paper machines of given sizes and capacities. 


Machine 

No.— 

Width 
of wire. 

Width 

of 

trimmed 

roll. 

Speed 

per 

minute. 

Capacity 
in 24 
hours. 

Men to 
machine. 

_ 

. 

One-man 

hours. 

Time 
cost per 
ton. 

Fourdrinier 
machine labor 
cost per— 

Machine 

hour. 

Ton. 


Inches. 

Inches. 

Feet. 

Tons. 



Hours. 



1. 

86 

76 

519 

21 

4 h 

108 

5.15 

$1.34 

$1.53 

2. 

86 

73£ 

459 

17 

41 

108 

6 3 

1 30 

1 84 

3. 

86 

76 

465 

18 

4£ 

108 

6.0 

1.30 

1.73 

4. 

92 

84 

462 

19 

4* 

108 

5.69 

1.31 

1.65 

5. 

108 

100 

451 

25 

5 

120 

4.8 

1.47 

1.41 

6. 

122 

113 

447 

27 

5 

120 

4.45 

1.49 

1.32 

7. 

145 

136 

485 

36 

5 

120 

3.33 

1.54 

1.06 

8. 

152 

140 

527 

41 

5£ 

132 

3.22 

1.68 

.98 

9. 

152 

140 

527 

41 

5£ 

132 

3.22 

1.68 

.98 

10. 

166 

158 

570 

50 


132 

2.64 

1.70 

.82 

11. 

158 

150 

570 

50 


132 

2.64 

1.70 

.82 

12. 

88 

80 

575 

25 

4 

96 

3.84 

1.20 

1.15 

13. 

116 

108 

585 

35 


132 

3.77 

1.59 

1.09 

14. 

148 

140 

585 

46 

5* 

132 

2.87 

1.62 

.88 


52 







































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


53 


In view of the foregoing, it becomes important to glance at the 
equipment of plants with a view to studying, first, the comparative 
efficiency of those in the United States with those of Canada and then 
comparative efficiency of machines within the United States. Most of 
the Canadian mills are new. The Fourdrinier, or paper machine, being 
the key to capacity and efficiency in a paper mill, has been taken as 
the standard by which to judge of efficiency of equipment. These 
machines are analyzed in the following table by capacity of machines, 
by speed as expressed by feet per minute, by width of trimmed roll, 
and by number of years since installed. For Canadian machines the 
facts are stated in simple averages or percentages for all machines. 

The American machines are shown, first, by simple averages and 
percentages as is done with Canadian machines; second, in three 
groups. Group A represents 56 per cent of all the American machines 
reported by the 38 paper mills reporting. Group B represents 44 
per cent of all machines reported. Group C consists of the machines 
m five of the best paper mills in the United States so located as to 
be near the belt of competition with Canadian mills, and forming a 
natural subdivision or grouping of American mills. 

The division between Group A and Group B was made primarily 
to show the proportion of American machines (Fourdriniers) superior 
or inferior to the Canadian average. While the basis of the table is 
the machine (Fourdrinier) rather than the mill or plant, yet the 
inadvisability of separating the machines in a mill (for, after all, the 
mill is the industrial unit of which the machine is the efficiencv 
measure) became apparent. Hence, each group represents mills as 
wholes, even though one or more machines might be found in a mill, 
which as machines might entitle them to different grouping. 


Table 18 . — News-print-paper machine equipment in the United States and Canada. 





American mills reporting. 



Canadian 
mills re¬ 
porting. 

All 

mills. 

A (56 per 
cent of 
all ma¬ 
chines). 

B (44 per 
cent of 
all ma¬ 
chines). 

C (5 best 
mills). 

Capacity of machines: 




32.4 

22.2 

40.0 

Average in 24 hours.r.. 

..tons.. 

31.0 

27.8 

Greatest in 24 hours. 

. .do_ 

50.0 

50.0 

50.0 

41.0 

50.0 

Least in 24 hours. 

. .do_ 

10.0 

5.0 

5.0 

12.0 

25.0 

Per cent 40 tons and over. 


18.7 

17.0 

27.3 

3.8 

45.5 

Per cent 30 tons and over. 


62.5 

41.5 

63.6 

13.5 

86.4 

Per cent 15 tons and under. 


6.2 

11.9 

9.1 

15.4 

0.0 

Speed of machines per minute: 


480.0 

465.6 

499.3 

422.7 

537.0 

Average number of feet of paper. 


Per cent 500 feet and over. 


68.7 

38.1 

57.6 

13.5 

90.9 

Per cent less than 400 feet. 


6.2 

20.3 

10.6 

32.6 

0.0 

Width of rolls, trimmed: 



109.9 

119.2 

98.1 

140.0 

Average number of inches. 


121.0 

Per cent with rolls 120 inches and over.. 


62.5 

34.7 

48.5 

17.3 

86.4 

Per cent with rolls less than 100 inches.. 


12.5 

36.4 

25.8 

50.0 

13.6 

Years installed 


7.2 

12.7 

10.0 

16.6 

8.1 

Average number of years installed. 


Per cent of machines installed 15 to 30 years. 

6.2 

34.7 

13.6 

61.5 

9.1 

Per cent machines of American manufacture. 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 

100.0 


The Fourdrinier machines in both countries were all manufactured 
in the United States. In the matter of capacity per machine in 24 
hours the Canadian machines show an average of 31 tons; the average 
of all American machines reported is 27.8 tons; those in Group A, 
32.4 tons; Group B, 22.2 tons; while the average per machine in the 
best mills, or Group C, is 40 tons of paper per machine each 24 hours. 





































54 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


In Canada, 18.7 per cent of all machines have a productive capacity 
of 40 tons or over per day of 24 hours. In the United States 17 per 
cent of the machines, taken as a whole, have similar capacity. In 
Group A, 27.3 per cent; in Group B, 3.8 per cent; while in Group C, 

45.5 per cent of all machines have a capacity of 40 tons or over. 
Taking as a basis machines with a capacity for production of 30 tons 
or over per day, we find that 62.5 per cent of all Canadian mills report¬ 
ing fall within this class, while 41.5 per cent of all American machines, 

63.6 per cent of the machines in Group A, 13.5 per cent of those in 
Group B, and 86.4 per cent of those in Group C come within this 
classification. 

If we look now for the smaller machines, of 15 tons and under, 
Canada has 6.2 per cent; the United States, taking all machines 
reported, has 11.9 per cent; Group Alias 9.1 per cent; Group B, 15.4 
per cent, while in the best mills none at all are found. 

By speed of machines in feet per minute is meant the number of 
feet of paper in a sheet the width of the roll that will pass through 
the machine and come out in a finished condition in one minute. To 
say that a machine has a width of trimmed roll of 140 inches and a 
speed of 500 feet per minute is to say that a continuous sheet of 
paper 140 inches wide is coming out of the machine at the rate of 500 
feet a minute. Of course, this width of trim and speed in feet per minute 
determines the daily tonnage capacity of the Fourdrinier machine. 

The average speed in feet per minute of all reporting Canadian 
machines was 480 feet; of all reporting American machines 465.6 feet. 
The average for Group A is 499.3 feet; for Group B, 422.7 feet; and 
for the machines found in the five best mills 537 feet per minute. 

In Canada 68.7 per cent of all reported machines have a speed rate 
of 500 feet or over per minute; in the United States 38.1 per cent; in 
Group A, 57.6 per cent; in Group B, 13.5 per cent of machines have 
such speed rate, while in the best American mills 90.9 per cent of the 
machines come within this classification. The percentage of machines 
having a speed of less than 400 feet a minute is 6.2 for Canada; 20.3 
per cent for the United States as a whole; 10.6 per cent for Group A; 

32.6 per cent for Group B; while none are found in Group C. 

The meaning of width of trimmed roll has been explained. The 
average width for Canadian mills is 121 inches; for all American mills, 
109.9 inches; for Group A, 119.2 inches; for Group B, 98.1 inches; 
while for Group C it is 140 inches. In Canada 62.5 oer cent of all 
machines reporting have a width of trimmed roll 120 inches and over; 
in the United States 34.7 per cent fall within this classmcxtion; in 
Group A, 48.5 per cent; Group B, 17.3 per cent; while in the best mills 
86.4 per cent of the machines have a width of roll 120 inches and over. 

Coming to the narrow rolls—less than 100 inches wide—we find this 
classification covers 12.5 per cent of Canadian machines, 36.4 per cent 
of all reporting American machines, 25.8 per cent of all machines in 
Group A, 50 per cent of machines in Group B, and 13.6 per cent of 
Group C. Canadian machines* have been installed an average of 7.2 
years; the average for the United States is 12.7 years; for Group A, 
10 years; Group B, 16.6 years; while in Group C, 8.1 years. In 
Canada 6.2 per cent of machines have been installed from 15 to 30 
years; in the United States this percentage is 34.7; in Group A, 13.6 
per cent; in Group B, 61.5 per cent; in Group C, 9.1 per cent. 

To the question, then, how far American mills are on an equal basis 
for competition with the Canadian mills in the matter of equipment, 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


55 


the answer seems to be that the total average of equipment and effi¬ 
ciency is slightly better for Canada than for the United States; that 
Group C, of domestic machines (five best mills), shows greatly supe¬ 
rior efficiency to the Canadian in all essential features; that Group 
A (56 per cent of all machines reported) shows practical equality 
with the efficiency of equipment in Canada; while Group B (44 per 
cent of all machines reported ) presents a condition which would force 
them, if obliged to meet really extensive competition from Canada, 
greatly to curtail other expenses, or greatly increase investment for 
improvement of equipment, or shift to other kinds of paper. 

These reflections presume, of course, an equally efficient labor force 
on both sides of the line. On this point the report of the representa¬ 
tive of the board engaged in collecting the statistics for Canada is 
submitted: 


EFFICIENCY OF LABOR IN CANADA. 

Canadian paper and pulp mills are equipped, as a rule, with the 
latest and most improved machines made by American manufac¬ 
turers in the United States. 

The general managers and superintendents are, for the most part, 
Americans of wide experience. Those who are Canadians by birth 
are men who, like the Americans, have had long years of training in 
American paper and pulp mills. The skilled men, the machine tend¬ 
ers, and other hands who operate the paper machines are, as a rule, 
Americans brought from the United States for the purpose. They 
are paid American rates of wages, although in several instances the 
rates are for a 12-hour shift, instead of for an 8-liour shift, as in Eastern 
United States. Excepting for the comparatively small number of 
skilled men necessary to operate the paper machines and the mechan¬ 
ics employed on repairs, the great majority of the men employed in 
the paper and pulp mills are classed as unskilled, and receive the 
pay of unskilled laborers. A study of the comparative wage tables 
in the report shows that the average rates of pay of unskilled men are 
lower in Canada than in the United States. For detailed figures see 
wage statistics in Part XIII. 

It would seem then that with modern mills, American machinery, 
American-trained managers and superintendents, and American 
skilled operatives, together with lower rates of wages for unskilled 
men, the Canadian manufacturing labor cost per unit of production 
in the modern and well-equipped mills of Canada would be consider¬ 
ably lower than in the modern and well-equipped mills of the United 
States. 

The tables show, however, that the Canadian labor cost per ton of 
news-print paper is only slightly lower on the average. That 41.5 per 
cent of the tonnage reported in the United States carries a manufac¬ 
turing labor cost of less than $3 per ton, while 54.7 per cent in Canada 
falls under $3. The total average for the United States is $3.27 as 
against $3.19 in Canada, notwithstanding Canada’s advantage in 
average equipment. This indicates that there is greater efficiency 
and experience in the first-class mills of the United States. 

With the exception of the machine tenders the labor employed in 
Canadian mills is French-Canadian. The mass of French-Canadians 
have been workers on the farm and in the forests and almost entirely 
out of touch with industrial life in shops, mills, or factories. 


56 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


They have had no opportunity for systematic training in manu¬ 
facturing establishments and Canadian mill managers do not seem 
to realize that the men in the log pond, the log deck, the barking 
room, the grinders, the wet machines, and the numerous other un¬ 
skilled positions are just as essential in their required places for the 
manufacture of paper as the skilled paper-machine tenders. Close 
inquiry of managers, superintendents, and foremen elicited uniform 
statements that the French-Canadians transferred from the farm and 
forests were not as yet dependable or efficient. They had not, it was 
stated, as yet acquired the degree of responsibility essential in every 
position and subdivision in the process of manufacture nor the close 
and undivided attention to duty required. 

It was further affirmed by managers that this irresponsibility 
extended to those who were placed in the position of minor foremen. 
The answer to the statements of the inefficiency of the French- 
Canadian laborers was the pointing out of numerous instances of 
efficiency of a high order in the higher grades of employment. It is 
charged that American-trained superintendents give preference to 
Americans in the skilled positions and that no opportunity has been 
afforded to French-Canadians to advance and it was pointed out that 
where strikes occurred and the French-Canadian given a chance he 
had succeeded. 

In a few establishments, in consequence of strikes or threatened 
strikes by Americans, a policy of training French-Canadians in the 
skilled occupations has been adopted. At present the high labor 
cost per ton is owing largely to the fact that the Canadian unskilled 
laborers do not accomplish as much per man as the laborers in the 
American mills. This is, however, a matter which in time would 
correct itself, and it is hardly to be doubted, with an incentive to 
acquire industrial training and skill and the necessity on the part of 
manufacturers for imparting such skill, the Canadian paper manu¬ 
facturers will ultimately train the French-Canadian tabor to the 
point where the manufacturers will reap the full fruit of their best 
equipments. 

The longer and colder winters in Canada also add much to the 
labor cost, more men being required to handle the frozen lap pulp 
and other materials; the outdoor movements of men and animals 
being impeded for a longer time by the frost and snow. 

The effect of the long and severe winter is shown in the following 
labor cost per ton of news-print paper each month during the summer 
and winter months in a Canadian mill: 


Month of year. 

Wages 
paid per 
ton of 
paper. 

Month of year. 

Wages 
paid per 
ton of 
paper. 

April, 1910. 

S3.25 

September, 1910 

S3 38 

May 1910.. 

3.54 

October, 1910. 

4 45 

June, 1910. . 

3.60 

November, 1910 

4 99 

July, 1910 . 

3.76 

December, 1910. ... 

5 10 

August, 1910. 

3.43 

January, 1911. 

5.33 





These figures represent the total pay-roll cost, not merely manu¬ 
facturing labor cost. That is to sav, all repair and upkeep and all 
other labor is in this statement of wages per ton of paper. It must 
not, therefore, he compared with manufacturing labor costs as 
shown on paper in the tables of cost. 

































Part IX. 


PRICES OF NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 

The price of news-print paper to the consumer differs according to 
the distance from the mill. The country may be divided roughly 
into five zones, each subject to a distinct price quotation. These 
zones are as follows: 

(1) Eastern, including the territory from the Canadian border to 
the Potomac and from the Atlantic Ocean as far west as Buffalo and 
Pittsburg. It includes the New England States, New York, New 
Jersey, Pennsylvania, Delaware, Maryland, and the District of Colum¬ 
bia. Within this zone the freight rate for paper does not exceed 
18 cents per 100 pounds, and the price within this territory is quoted, 
as a rule, irrespective of the distance of any particular point from 
the mill. Prices are practically the same for the seven largest cities; 
namely, New York, Boston, Philadelphia, Baltimore, Washington, 
Pittsburg, and Buffalo. In the smaller towns in the same territory 
the prices are somewhat higher, owing to the fact that the orders 
are smaller, the papers in those towns having a much smaller circula¬ 
tion. The smaller papers in New York City are largely supplied by 
jobbers and are charged prices substantially the same as those paid 
by the papers in the smaller towns purchasing direct from the paper 
mills. 

(2) Middle Western or Ohio zone: This includes the States of Ohio, 
Indiana, Illinois, and the city of St. Louis, Mo. 

Michigan though geographically belonging to the same group 
stands by itself in the matter of paper prices. Owing to its own 
mills and its proximity to the Canadian border it enjoys a freight rate 
lower even than many points in the Eastern States, and prices in that 
territory are therefore somewhat different from those in the other 
States. 

(3) Southern zone, including the States of North Carolina, South 
Carolina, Georgia, Alabama, Florida, Mississippi, Louisiana, and 
Tennessee. The prices in this territory differ considerably according 
to distance and the size and desirability of the contract. 

(4) The Pacific coast. 

(5) States between the Mississippi River and the Rocky Mountains, 
and the Southwestern States. Most of the papers in this territory 
have a small circulation, and as a rule buy their paper in sheets 
from jobbers in Chicago, but few of them being supplied with paper 
rolls from mills. Prices in this territory are therefore higher than 
in the others and show a great variation. 

The following tables show the course of prices in various centers of 
the United States. The figures were obtained from the original con¬ 
tracts on file in the offices of the various paper mills examined by the 
board, and represent in each case the highest, lowest, and average 
price in each commercial center for the corresponding year. In 
analyzing the prices of the different mills it has been found that they 

57 


58 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


naturally fall in two groups, the prices in each group being suffi¬ 
ciently uniform to represent a distinct set of price quotations. The 
relative importance of each group will be seen from the tons of 
paper sold by each. 

Table 19. —Prices of news-print paper in the eastern territory charged by mills in 

Group I. 


Years. 

Tons. 

Boston. 

Price per ton. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1898. 

8,000 

$35. 00 

$35.00 

$35.00 

1899. 

8' 000 

35.00 

35. 00 

35.00 

1900. 

8.000 

35.00 

35.00 

35.00 

1901. 

6,850 

40.00 

47.60 

43. 75 

1902. 

9.040 

40.00 

50. 00 

42. 03 

1903. 

17,999 

42. 00 

52 00 

45.50 

1904. 

25,229 

43.00 

53.40 

47. 52 

1905. 

14.671 

38.00 

55. 00 

41. 77 

1906. 

14,608 

38. 00 

55.00 

40. S2 

1907. 

31,655 

38.00 

51. 00 

40. 17 

1908. 

36,595 

40. 00 

55. 00 

45.15 

1909. 

69.199 

42 00 

55. 00 

42. 67 

1910. 

9,965 

45. 00 

4S. 00 

45.09 

1911. 

25,569 

43. 20 

48. 00 

43. 80 






New York. 

Philadelphia. 

Years. 


Price per ton. 


Price per ton. 


Tons. 




Tons. 













Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 


Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1898. 

100 

837.50 

$37.50 

$37.50 





1899. 

16,800 

37.50 

42.50 

41.18 





1900. 

34,531 

35.00 

57.00 

40.47 

5,730 

$45.40 

$45.40 

$45. 40 

1901. 

50,719 

35.00 

57.00 

41.45 

50,400 

40.00 

47.50 

42.53 

1902. 

25,430 

35.00 

50.00 

39.90 

26,290 

40.00 

47.50 

40.34 

1903. 

32, 493 

35.00 

52.00 

42.06 

29,244 

40.00 

47.50 

43.51 

1904. 

27,411 

35.00 

53.00 

41.38 

17, 476 

44.00 

47.50 

44.19 

1905. 

30,458 

37.60 

53.00 

42.21 

5,669 

41.00 

47.00 

44.06 

1906. 

30,368 

37.00 

50.00 

38.46 

2,936 

41.00 

44.00 

43.12 

1907. 

33,063 

38.00 

52.00 

41.53 

5,375 

40.00 

49.00 

43.77 

1908. 

48,923 

38.00 

55.00 

45.91 

54,450 

41.00 

45.00 

41.68 

1909. 

40,209 

38.00 

50.00 

42.88 

13,500 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

1910. 

29,471 

44.20 

50.00 

45.06 

24, 700 

45.00 

51.00 

45.78 

1911. 

127,229 

43.20 

50.00 

44.51 

3,000 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 


Baltimore. 

Washington. 

Years. 


Price per ton. 


Price per ton. 











1 OIlS. 




J> Olio* 






Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 


Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1900. 




1,031 

$42. 00 

$45.00 

$42 38 

1901. 

200 

$47. 00 

$47. 00 

$47.00 

1,929 

42. 00 

50.00 

44. 05 

1902. 

547 

45.00 

47.50 

45.03 

1,375 

45. 00 

48.00 

45.82 

1903. 

2,556 

45.00 

48. 00 

45.29 

1,638 

45. 00 

50.00 

46. 25 

1904. 

2,983 

44. 00 

50.00 

45.62 

3,684 

44.00 

50.00 

46. 47 

1905. 

4,506 

40. 00 

48.00 

43. 04 

4.371 

38. 00 

50.00 

42.38 

1906. 

8,973 

38.00 

47.00 

39.13 

3,925 

38.00 

48.00 

40.22 

1907. 

7,451 

38. 00 

47.00 

38.76 

3,975 

38.00 

50.00 

41.38 

1908. 

7,240 

45. 00 

52.00 

49.27 

6,552 

45.00 

54.00 

49.33 

1909. 

8,600 

45. 00 

45. 00 

45. 00 

6,585 

45. 00 

50. 00 

45.06 

1910. 

6,500 

45. 00 

45. 00 

45. 00 

7,285 

45. 00 

48. 00 

45.03 

1911. 

11,000 

45. 00 

_ 

45. 00 

45. 00 

6,085 

45. 00 

48.00 

45. 04 






























































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


59 


Table 19. —Prices of news-print paper in the eastern territory charged by 

Group /—Continued. 


mills in 


Years. 

Pittsburg. 

Buffalo. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1898. 









1899. 









1900. 

2,242 

$42.50 

$50.00 

$46.47 

800 

$46.00 

$50.00 

$48.75 

1901. 

6,596 

40.00 

50.00 

41.88 

5,800 

43.00 

50.00 

45.64 

1902. 

7,623 

40.00 

47.50 

41.90 

2,580 

43.00 

46.00 

43.09 

1903. 

4,055 

44.00 

52.00 

44.29 

5,300 

44.00 

44.00 

44.00 

1904. 

13,758 

43.00 

52.00 

43.85 

4,650 

44.00 

47.00 

44.22 

1905. 

29,610 

42.00 

50.60 

42.62 

10,050 

38.00 

45.00 

43.14 

1906. 

23,479 

38.00 

47.00 

39.47 

5,050 

38.00 

45.00 

39.45 

1907. 

20,026 

40.00 

55.00 

40.33 

3,325 

40.00 

43.00 

40.89 

1908. 

19,533 

44.00 

55.00 

44.18 

9,050 

45.00 

52.00 

49.60 

1909. 

19,447 

44.00 

52.00 

44.10 

4,750 

45.00 

47.00 

45.16 

1910. 

28,862 

44.00 

52.00 

44.59 

1,525 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

1911. 

24,925 

40.00 

52.00 

43.23 

325 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 


Years. 

Summary for the seven cities. 

Summary all other eastern cities. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1898 . 

8,100 
24,800 

52.334 
122,494 

72,885 

93,285 

95,191 

99.335 
89,339 

104,870 
182,343 
162,290 
108,308 
198,133 

$35.00 
35.00 
35.00 
35.00 
35.00 
35.00 
35.00 
37. 60 
37.00 
38.00 
38.00 
38.00 
44.00 
40.00 

$37.50 

42.50 

57.00 

57.00 

50.00 

52.00 

53.40 

55.00 

55.00 

55.00 

55.00 

55.00 

52.00 

52.00 

$35.03 
39.18 
40.59 

42.30 
40.80 
43.55 
44.35 
42.72 
39.47 
40.78 
44.75 
43.38 
45.10 

44.31 





1899.... 





1900 . 

1901 . 

1902 . 

1903 . 

1904 . 

1905 . 

1906 . 

1907 .:. 

1908 . 

1909 . 

1910 . 

1911 . 

3,888 

25,910 

21,952 

35,365 

32,306 

42,965 

33,819 

37,794 

43,971 

35.310 

30,598 

22,005 

$43.00 
40.00 
40.00 
40.00 
44.00 
37.00 
37.00 
37.00 
40.00 

39.80 

42.80 
45.00 

$60.00 
60.00 
60.00 
58.00 
58.00 
58.00 
55.00 
60.00 
60.00 
57.00 
55.00 
55.00 

$46.38 

46.26 
44.64 
46.01 
46. 61 
44.16 

42.27 
43.03 
48.96 

45.13 

45.14 
45.39 


Table 20. —Prices of news-print paper in the eastern territory charged by mills in 

Group II. 



New York. 

Boston, New York, Philadelphia, Bal¬ 
timore, and Washington combined. 

Years. 


Price per ton. 


Price per ton. 


Tons. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Weighted 

average. 

Tons. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Weighted 

average. 

1901 . 

1902 . 

15,201* 
47,467 
51,629 

$34.00 
34.00 

$45. 00 
45.00 

$34. 44 
34. 54 

20,885 

69,859 

$34.00 
34.00 

$45.00 
45.00 

$35.95 
35.69 

1903. 

34.00 

48. 00 

35.15 

60,645 

34.00 

48.00 

35.91 

1904. 

47^ 525 
59,145 
100,304 
76,396 
76,160 
79,129 
99,447 
22,201 

34.00 

48.00 

35. 27 

92,410 

34. 00 

48.00 

37.98 

1905. 

34.00 

46.00 

36.16 

80,216 

34.00 

46.00 

37.68 

1906. 

34.00 

42.00 

36.67 

146,417 

34.00 

42.00 

36.78 

1907. 

37.00 

50.00 

37. 72 

87,169 

37.00 

50. 00 

38.03 

1908. 

37.00 

50.00 

37. 74 

116,726 

37.00 

50.00 

39.97 

1909. 

37.00 

46. 00 

38.38 

116,008 

37. 00 

47. 00 

39.74 

1910. 

37.00 

45. 00 

39.40 

136,395 

37.00 

45.00 

40.32 

1911. 

41.80 

45.00 

43. 78 

24,801 

41.80 

45.00 

43.90 






























































































































60 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 21 .—Prices of news-print paper in Middle Western cities and in New Orleans 

charged by mills in Group I. 


Years. 

Chicago. 

St. Louis. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1000 

881 

S37 50 

$50.00 

$40.64 





1901. 

5,093 

37.50 

50.00 

44.01 

11,500 

$42.50 

$42.50 

$42.50 

1902. 

3,913 

37.50 

47.00 

44.03 

16,362 

41.00 

42.50 

41.88 

1903. 

1^859 

45.00 

50.00 

47.05 

7,838 

41.00 

46.00 

42.75 

1904. 

' 491 

46.20 

48.00 

46.98 

12,250 

42.50 

46.00 

43.55 

1905. 

45,350 

41.00 

48.00 

41.81 

21,150 

40.40 

46.00 

41.93 

1906. 

61,295 

40.00 

42.00 

40.02 

3,600 

40.00 

42.00 

41.00 

1007 

61.589 

40 00 

47.00 

40.87 





1908. 

76,462 

42.00 

52.00 

42.46 

2,000 

50.00 

50.00 

50.00 

1909. 

49,210 

42.00 

50.00 

42.09 

3,000 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

1910. 

10,547 

42.00 

48.00 

43.76 

18,527 

45.00 

47.00 

45.00 

1911. 

99,599 

43.20 

46.00 

43.91 

6,083 

45.00 

47.00 

45.03 


Indianapolis. 

Cincinnati. 

Years. 


Price per ton. 


Price per ton. 


Tons. 




Tons. 













Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 


Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1900. 





2,100 

$40.00 

$45. 00 

$42. 38 

1901. 





5,157 

40. 00 

52. 50 

42. 94 

1902. 





11' 638 

39. 60 

52. 50 

40.19 

1903. 

636 

$45. 00 

$48.00 

$45. 25 

li; 608 

39.60 

49.00 

41.88 

1904. 

640 

45.00 

48.00 

45. 94 

8,595 

39. 60 

49.00 

42.63 

1905. 

344 

40. 00 

48.00 

45.03 

8,817 

41.00 

48. 50 

41. 80 

1906. 

240 

40.00 

42. 50 

40. 86 

8, 450 

40.00 

47.00 

40.34 

1907. 





8, 719 

41. 00 

50. 00 

41.86 

1908. 

1,200 

50.00 

50.00 

50.00 

7 ,374 

47.00 

50.00 

49.95 

1909.r. 

6,600 

44.00 

50.00 

45. 45 

7,425 

45.00 

47.50 

45.06 

1910. 

1,300 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

7,240 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

1911. 

800 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

240 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 


Years. 

Cleveland. 

Summary. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Tons. 

Price per ton. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

1900. 

700 

$50.00 

$55.00 

$53.21 

3,681 

$37. 50 

$55.00 

$44.02 

1901. 

1,508 

40.74 

50.00 

45.99 

23,258 

37.50 

52.50 

43.15 

1902. 

3,329 

40. 74 

55.00 

45.82 

35,242 

37.50 

55.00 

41.93 

1903. 

4,736 

45.00 

55.00 

45.38 

26,677 

39.60 

55.00 

43. 20 

1904. 

820 

45.00 

46.00 

45.12 

22,796 

39.60 

49.00 

43. 40 

1905. 

8,528 

41.00 

46.00 

42.14 

84,189 

40.00 

48.50 

41.89 

1906. 

10,301 

38.00 

45.00 

41. 40 

83,886 

38.00 

47.00 

40.27 

1907. 

7,563 

38.00 

50.00 

40. 75 

77,871 

38.00 

50.00 

40.97 

1908. 

9,972 

41.00 

55.00 

46.82 

97,008 

41.00 

55.00 

43.72 

1909. 

9,925 

44.00 

52.00 

44. 46 

76,160 

42.00 

52.00 

43.09 

1910. 

5,471 

44.00 

47.00 

44. 52 

43,085 

42.00 

48.00 

44.64 

1911. 

4,575 

45.00 

47.00 

45.02 

111,297 

43.20 

47.00 

44.02 





















































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 61 

Table 21 .—Prices of news-print paper in Middle Western cities and in New Orleans— Con. 


New Orleans. 


1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

1910 

1911 


Years. 


Price per ton. 


1 UilS. 

Lowest. 

Highest. 

Average. 

2,050 

$40.00 

$46.00 

$43.15 

1,133 

40.00 

48.00 

44.47 

1,567 

45.00 

48.00 

47.61 

1,750 

48.00 

48.00 

48.00 

2,625 

45.00 

48.00 

47.00 

1,750 

45.00 

45.00 

45.00 

2.000 

44.00 

44.00 

44.00 

2,000 

48.00 

48.00 

48.00 

2,000 

48.00 

48.00 

48.00 

2,000 

48.00 

48.00 

48.00 

5,650 

47.20 

48.00 

47.43 


Table 22. —Prices of Canadian news-print paper shipments delivered in the United 

States in 1910. 


Principal points of 
delivery. 


New York. 

Chicago. 

St. Louis. 

Cincinnati. 

San Francisco. 

Memphis, Tenn. 

Nashville, Tenn. 

Knoxville, Tenn 

Louisville, Ky. 

Springfield, Mass.... 
Springfield, Ohio.... 
Fort Wayne, Ind.... 

Cleveland, Ohio. 

Youngstown, Ohio.. 

Dayton, Ohio. 

Camden, N. J. 

Detroit, Mich. 


Price per 100 
pounds f. o. b. 
mill. 

Low- 

High- 

est. 

est. 

$1.40 

$2.1325 

1.644 

2.1375 

1.40 

1.765 

1.665 

2.0095 

1.93 

1.945 

1.758 


1. 9603 


1.8505 


1.692 

1.9365 

1.98 

2.015 

1. 7425 

1.965 

1.58 

1.595 

1.925 


1.635 


1.8158 


1.585 


1.615 

1.63 


Costs of delivery per 100 pounds in the United States. 


Freight 

charges. 

Duties. 

Commis¬ 

sions. 

Cartage. 

Low¬ 

est. 

High¬ 

est. 

Low¬ 

est. 

High¬ 

est. 

Low¬ 

est. 

High¬ 

est. 

Low¬ 

est. 

High¬ 

est. 

$0.18 
.18 
.215 
.155 
.75 

$0.18 
.18 
.215 
.18 
.75 

$0.305 
.1875 
.32 
.1875 
.32 

$0.32 
.305 
.32 
.32 
.305 

$0.056 

$0.057 
.0656 

$0.0325 
.025 

$0.04 

.025 

.09 

.10 

.035 

.035 





.305 

.355 


.1875 

.1875 


.1022 









.18 

.18 

.155 

.19 

.1875 

.305 

.1875 

.305 


.096 



.20 

.155 

.19 

.17 

.18 

.155 

.22 

.155 

.32 

.1875 

.32 

.305 

.32 

.1875 

.32 

.32 




.065 

.096 















.0667 







.035 

.035 


.155 

.305 



.035 


Total 

costs. 


Low¬ 

est. 


* 1 . 

2 . 

1 . 

2 . 

3. 


90 

22 

935 

175 

00 


555 

40 

30 

50 

15 

09 

40 

135 

225 

175 

125 


High¬ 

est. 


$2.65 
2.50 
2.30 
2.45 
3.00 


2.40 
2.50 
2. 40 
2.09 


2.125 


Table 23. —Prices of news-print paper exported from Canada to the United States during 

the year 1910. 



F. o. b. mill. 

Delivered in 
United States. 

Destination. 

Tons. 

Average 
price 
per ton. 

Tons. 

Average 
price 
per ton. 

RiY?tnn ...... 

44 

$36.98 

22 

$45.53 

Nfiw York . 

638 

38.72 

616 

48.81 

PhilaHplnhia .... 

23 

39.51 

23 

50.02 


99 

39.00 




223 

39.06 

202 

48.92 

Summary for the 5 cities. 

1,027 

39.06 

863 

48.92 


730 

36.84 

730 

45. 78 


279 

34.91 

235 

45.26 


943 

36.57 

475 

46.43 


66 

39.43 

85 

47.07 


2,018 

36. 51 

1,525 

45.97 






















































































































































62 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Taking the eastern territory we find from Table 19 that in the 
city of New York the lowest price charged by the mills in Group I 
was $37.50 in 1898, which was reduced to $35 in 1900, and remained 
unchanged during the life of some of the old long-term contracts 
until 1905, when it was raised to $37.60, until by gradual increases 
it was advanced to $44.20 in 1910, dropping in 1911 to $43.20. 
The year 1900 was marked by the announcement on the part of a 
number of mills of a new price policy, namely, the discontinuance of 
long-term contracts and the substitution of the annual contract 
instead. The change in the contract policy is reflected in the set of 
highest prices, which, as will be seen from the table, rose from $37.50 
in 1898 and $42.50 in 1899 to $57 in 1900, which was reduced to 
$50 in 1902. Between 1902 and 1908 the highest price for New York 
fluctuated between $52 and $55, dropping to $50 in 1909, at which 
it has remained since. 

The average price was obtained by dividing the amount of the 
total sales by the total tons sold during each year. This price shows 
a gradual rise, with fluctuations up and down, from $37.50 in 1898 to 
$44.51 in 1911. 

The prices in the other large cities in the eastern territory charged 
by this group of mills appear from the table. In some cases, as Phila¬ 
delphia, for example, the fluctuation over the period is less, but from 
the last column but one it appears that the summary for the seven 
large cities shows a movement very close to that for New York. 
The last column gives a summary for the smaller eastern cities. 
This shows a higher level of prices, but a much smaller fluctuation 
over the 10 years. The lowest prices start with $43 in 1900, dropping 
to $40 the following year, rising to $44 in 1904, dropping again to $37 
in 1905, and, with a few fluctuations up and down, reaching $45 
during the year 1911. The highest prices fluctuate between $60 in 
1900 and $55 in 1911. The average price is much closer to the 
lowest than to the highest, showing that the higher set of prices 
represents a much smaller tonnage than the lowest. It is also 
noteworthy that the average price for the smaller cities shows practi¬ 
cally no change in the prices during the 10-year period, and, if 
anything, a lower level at present as compared with the beginning of 
the decade, the price in 1900 being $46.38 and $45.39 in 1911. This 
is obviously explained by the fact that the low prices shown in the 
earlier period are due to the long-term contracts made with the 
metropolitan dailies. 

In weighing the relative importance of the two sets of prices it is 
well to note that the tonnage of all the small towns in the eastern 
territory is much smaller than that in the seven large cities in the 
same territory, being 22,005 tons for the former as against 198,133 
for the latter in 1911. With the exception of the year 1900, the ratio 
between the tonnages of the two groups of cities in 1911 is the smallest 
during the decade, rising to more than one-third in other years during 
the decade. 

Table 20 shows the course of prices in New York City and five large 
cities of the eastern territory charged by the mills in Group II. The 
price quotations in Group II show a considerably lower level of prices 
in the lowest as well as the highest quotations. Thus the lowest price 
for the same cities in Group II for 1901 was $34 as compared with $35 
in Group I. The price was raised in 1907 to $37 as compared with $38 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


63 


in Group I , and remained at $37 until 1910, when it was $44 in Group I. 
It rose to $41.80 in 1911, during which year it for the first time 
exceeded the corresponding price in Group 1, where it was $40. 

The difference between the highest prices in the two groups is 
much more marked than between the lowest. Thus the highest 
price in 1901 in Group II was $45 as against $57 in Group I. It rose 
to $48 in 1903 as against $52 in Group I, dropping to $46 in 1905 as 
against $55 in Group I, and had a further drop in 1906 to $42, as 
compared with $55 in Group I. In 1907 it rose to $50 as compared 
with $55 in Group I, and gradually declined to $45 in 1911 as compared 
with $52 in Group I. The average price was likewise at a lower 
level than in the first-mentioned group, measuring a difference of 
about $5, but in 1911 the price rose to $43.90, while the price in 
Group I declined to $44.31, the difference between the two thus 
being reduced to but 41 cents a ton. 

Table 21 shows the course of prices charged by the mills represented 
by Group I in the Middle Western cities, Chicago, St. Louis, Indian¬ 
apolis, Cincinnati, and Cleveland, as well as the summary of the five 
cities, and also the prices in New Orleans covering the last decade. 
The general tendency of the prices in this territory is substantially the 
same as in the eastern territory. This can be seen upon comparing 
the curves representing the fluctuations in prices during the period in 
the respective territories. The prices in New Orleans, on the whole, 
show a much smaller fluctuation during the period, the average price 
being, as a rule, somewhat higher than in the eastern territory, the 
difference representing principally the additional freight expense. 

Tables 22 shows prices in 1910 charged by Canadian paper mills 
for paper exported to the LTnited States. These prices were obtained 
from the consular invoices sworn to by the exporters at the United 
States consulates in Canada. Table 23 shows two sets of prices, one 
f. o. b. mill in Canada, the other prices delivered in the various cities 
in the United States, including freight and duty. These figures, 
however, represent a small percentage of the total imports and there¬ 
fore must be treated with caution. It will be seen that the average 
f. o. b. mill price for the five cities of Boston, New York, Philadelphia, 
Pittsburg, and Buffalo was $39.06, and for the four Middle Western 
cities of Chicago, St. Louis, Cincinnati, and Cleveland $36.51. The 
price, however, when delivered in the respective cities, after duty and 
freight has been added, is fully as high if not higher than the corre¬ 
sponding average prices charged by United States mills. 


Prices of news-print paper in New York City charged hy mills in Group 1. 


64 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER, 


) 


i 


O vo o *0 o Jo 

VO Lq O 



(See Table 19.) 































Prices of news-print paper in seven largest cities in eastern territory charged by mills in Group 1. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER, 


65 



S. Doc. 31, 62-1-5 


(See Table 19.) 






































CHABT XXX. 

Prices of news-print paper in eastern territory outside of seven largest cities charged by mills in Group 1. 


66 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 



(See Table 20.) 











































Prices of news-print paper in New York City charged by mills in Group 2. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


67 


V 



(See Table 21.) 


































CHART V. 

Prices of news-print paper in Jive large cities in eastern territory charged by mills in Group 2. 


68 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 



(See Table 21.) 






























CHART VI. 

Prices of news-print paper in five large middle western cities. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


69 



(See Table 22.) 












































Part X. 


CAPITAL INVESTMENT AND DEPRECIATION. 

Any full consideration of the subject of cost of producing, news¬ 
print paper involves some discussion of the question of the invest¬ 
ment involved in relation to output. This is necessary both as a basis 
for estimating the charge to be allowed for depreciation and as a 
basis for understanding the real significance of the margin between 
mill cost and selling price. The ratio of capital investment to out¬ 
put in this industry is high. On this point, as on all others, con¬ 
flicting claims are made. Some firms assert that the annual turnover 
is not more than 40 per cent of the investment. No absolute figures 
are available, but it may be stated as an approximation that the 
annual product (at average mill cost) is not far from one-half the 
necessary capital invested. 

In estimating investment the most convenient method is to take 
as a basis the daily ton of output of a balanced plant. By a balanced 
plant is meant a combination of ground-wood mill and sulphite mill 
with a paper plant such that the pulp needs of the latter are practi¬ 
cally taken care of by the two pulp mills. To the cost of building and 
equipping the three mills must be added the cost of hydraulic devel¬ 
opment to produce the necessary horsepower for the grinders and 
additional power converted into electrical energy for incidental ma¬ 
chines in the mills. 

It is out of the question to make airy general statements as to invest¬ 
ment in woodlands for the supply of the raw material, since the poli¬ 
cies of different companies vary so greatly and the prices of woodlands 
have fluctuated so widely under the influence of a speculative demand. 
So far as the relation of investment to cost is concerned this would 
not be a factor where the wood is bought from subsidiary companies, 
or charged into the pulp mills, at a price which includes profits and 
stumpage. Where, however, the wood is charged in at a price which 
represents only the absolute cost of cutting and delivering, the margin 
between mill cost of paper and selling price would be higher, and this 
higher margin would represent a return on the woodland investment 
as well as on the investment in plant. 

For similar reasons the problem of the value of riparian rights and 
the cost of water storage is not susceptible of any general treatment. 
Storage facilities are a necessity for a water-power development, pro¬ 
vided that a uniform yearly flow is needed in order to deliver the 
ground wood pulp with daily regularity. Its value might be esti¬ 
mated by comparison with the cost of the necessary auxiliary steam 
power required to provide a constant horsepower. A better method, 
if the cost of storage be disregarded, is to include in the investment 
the additional grinder capacity necessary to produce during periods 
of good water an adequate supply of ground wood pulp to carry the 
mill over the periods of low water. For example, if we assume that 

70 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


71 


80 tons of ground wood are used for each 100 tons of paper, a plant 
producing 100 tons of paper to-day would not be properly “bal¬ 
anced” (in the absence of adequate water storage) if its ground- 
wood capacity was only 80 tons per day. Estimates of the excess 
allowance naturally depend upon local water conditions. One well- 
equipped plant making 100 tons per day is able to supply its own 
pulp with a grinder capacity of 140 tons of ground wood in the face 
of bad water conditions. Even higher estimates have been made in 
some cases, but this is probably a fair sample, on the basis of no water 
storage. The better the storage the smaller the number of grinders 
necessary. 

The cost of hydraulic development is purely a matter of local con¬ 
ditions and may vary from below $30 to over $100 per horsepower. 

A desirable site for a water-power development is valued, first, by 
the extent of its drainage area; second, its run-off per square mile; 
third, the constancy of this run-off, which fixes the average yearly 
flow; fourth, the reservoir possibilities; fifth, the length and height of 
the dam and the necessary length of the penstocks and flumes to 
carry the water to the turbines; and, sixth, by the riparian rights. 

Again, a powder site in a remote location would not stand as high 
an investment as would a site in a location where its cost of develop¬ 
ment would be regulated on the basis of what the power could be 
disposed of for manufacturing purposes. 

Climatic conditions are also a factor in the cost of developing a 
power, due to their influence on the fluctuation in flow from severe 
winters in northern climates and dry summers in warmer climates. 
It is obvious, therefore, that the value of a water power for a ground- 
wood property must be determined entirely by the local conditions. 
This variation being so great, any attempt to fix a definite cost per 
ton of production without exact knowledge of the site is problematical. 

The calculation in any case would depend on the amount of horse¬ 
power needed per ton of product and the cost of development per 
horsepower. No certain figure can be given for either. 

Taking the matter of horsepower for the grinders per ton of ground 
wood, this varies in different plants from 60 to 70 or more. If 70 
be taken for example, and it is assumed that 80 tons of ground wood 
is needed for 100 tons of paper, the cost of hydraulic development 
for the ground-wood mill would be: 

(1) If the cost is $30 per horsepower: 



= $1,680 per daily ton of paper. 


(2) If the cost is $100 per horsepower: 



= $5,600 per daily ton of paper. 


Further allowance must be made for additional power for electrical 
energy. Seventy-five or eighty horsepower per ton of paper per day 
is a common estimate for a balanced plant. 

Such calculations do not provide for excess grinding capacity, to 
make sure of a uniform supply of pulp in absence of water storage. 
If this should be included on a basis of 140 tons ground-wood capacity 
to 100 tons of paper, with 65 horsepower per ton of ground wood, and 
10 additional horsepower per ton of paper, we should have 9,100 





72 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


horsepower for grinders and 1,000 horsepower for other purposes. 
Then 

(1) At a cost of $30 per horsepower: 

10,100 H. P.XS30 AOA 

—---= $3,030 per daily ton oi paper. 

(2) At a cost of $100 per horsepower: 

10,100 H. P.X$100 A , 

-jqq- -— = $10,100 per daily ton of paper. 

The construction cost of the balanced plant will be lower than the 
cost for the three separate units built independently. The equipment, 
which is the largest item of the total cost, would be the same. 

The equipment comprises: 

Ground-wood mill .—Three pocket grinders, directly connected to 
horizontal turbines, centrifugal screens, 72-incli wet machines, hydrau¬ 
lic pulp presses, log hauls, slasher saw rigs, barkers, splitters, con- 
veyors, etc. 

The auxiliary power plant for driving machinery other than the 
grinders is commonly provided by electric current generated by an 
independent horizontal turbine. The power, derived through burn¬ 
ing the waste wood, is utilized for heating and other incidental auxil¬ 
iaries. 

Sulphite mill .—The equipment of the sulphite mill comprises: 

In the wood room: Log haul, saw rig, barkers, splitters, chippers, 
crushers, chip screen, conveyors, and elevators. The refuse from this 
operation being conveyed to an auxiliary shaving-burning boiler in 
the power house, and utilized for heating the sulphite mill. 

In the digester house: Digesters, and the necessary pumping equip¬ 
ment. 

In the blow-pit room: Blow pits and pumps. 

In the wet machine and screen room: Complete diaphragm screen 
equipment with auxiliary feltless wet machines and slushers. 

Paper mill .—In the beater room: Pulp openers or broke beaters 
and the usual beater, Jordan, chest equipment, and pumps. 

In the machine room: Fourdrinier paper machines, screens,’slitters, 
reels, drum winders, chests, suction pumps, and pumping equipment. 

In the finishing building: Reels, slitters, and cutters. 

It will appear from the above statements that the calculation of 
necessary capital investment per ton per day is by no means an easy 
matter. The lowest actual balanced mill which we have examined 
in this regard shows $15,000. The lowest calculations we have 
received (from a professional engineer) show an estimated range 
from $15,000 for a 25-ton mill, with $13,000 for a 50-ton mill, and 
$10,900 for a 100-ton mill to $9,700 fora 200-ton mill. These last 
figures do not include any part of the cost of hydraulic development, so 
that the totals would be increased by this amount, which, on the basis 
of 75 horsepower per ton, would be $2,250 if the cost per horsepower is 
$30, or $3,750 at a cost per horsepower of $50, or $7,500 at a cost 
per horsepower of $100. 

It may be said in general terms that under normal conditions an 
investment for hydraulic power and fully equipped balanced plant, 
of best construction and equipment, and a capacity of 100 tons per 
day, ought to be fully covered by $17,000 per ton per day. For a 




PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


73 


plant of smaller capacity the cost would be somewhat greater. This 
does not include either cost of water storage facilities or provision for 
extra grinding capacity to offset lack of such storage. If these were 
included the total might be increased to $20,000. Either of these 
figures should be taken as a liberal estimate. 

Besides the actual investment for plant and power development 
the element of working capital is a large item in this industry. We 
have varying statements on this head from $2,500 to $6,000 per ton 
per day. In the report made to us by a competent engineer it is 
calculated by him that working capital required per ton per day 
would be $3,200 for a 200-ton plant, $3,500 for a 100-ton plant, and 
$3,900 for a 50-ton plant. 

If working capital is included as a part of the total investment, no 
interest charge on this item should be included in cost. If, however, 
the investment is taken to represent only construction and develop¬ 
ment and the working capital is borrowed outside, the interest should 
be included. On the basis of $3,500 per ton per day this charge 
would be from 50 to 60 cents per ton. 

DEPRECIATION CHARGES. 

Under the head of depreciation it becomes important, first, to define 
just what is meant by the term, and what is covered as well as what is 
not covered by the estimate of depreciation as here given. First, 
then, it is assumed that the plant will be kept in perfect repair in so far 
as that is humanly possible. All charges for maintenance, repairs, 
renewals of worn-out parts or machines (not involving new equipment 
or increased production), and all upkeep expense shall be charged to 
operating expense. 

Depreciation is that charge, in the form of a per cent on capital con¬ 
sumed in construction and equipment, which, spread evenly over the 
estimated life of the plant as a whole, will provide a fund which at the 
close of the life of the plant will equal the investment. It is not a 
charge in lieu of a maintenance charge, but in excess of actual main¬ 
tenance and upkeep, to take care of that inevitable decay which 
ultimately comes in spite of renewals and repairs. It is a charge 
which will return the original investment when the plant itself is past 
repairing. It includes the creation of a fund to take care of the 
obsoletion of machinery by reason of new inventions or improvements 
of machinery which renders the equipment antiquated and no longer 
economical. It is, in short, an insurance fund against the ravages of 
mechanical improvements and processes and the decay which in¬ 
evitably conies with time. 

As to obsoletion, it is believed and presumed that the Fourdrinier 
has about reached the limit of perfection, and an up-to-date machine 
will not be displaced before it would be entirely worn out, barring, of 
course, some complete revolution in method of production of paper 
which would render the Fourdrinier itself obsolete. That 3 per cent 
on actual construction cost (which is what is here meant by capital 
investment) will take care of depreciation and obsoletion of the whole 
plant is the estimate of competent engineers. This will provide a 
fund in 33 years equal to the original cost. With adequate upkeep, 
of course, a plant will last much longer than this, but the element of 
obsoletion might absorb the difference. 


74 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 

There are specific parts of the plant, such as water development, 
where the depreciation would not be more than half that amount; in 
such parts as foundations, etc., it would be nothing, practically, while 
on some parts of the equipment it would be entirely inadequate; but 
taking the plant and the investment as a whole, 3 per cent is ample to 
cover all actual depreciation in excess of upkeep. 

The high cost of plant and equipment in the paper industry makes 
the depreciation charge per ton figure as a high percentage of the cost 
of product if entered as a cost item. As already stated, since most of 
the mills did not charge off depreciation to cost, the depreciation 
item was taken out of all the schedules to make the figure comparable. 
In some cases the amounts actually charged to depreciation and taken 
out of the figures, as presented in the tables, were from $1 to $1.92 
per ton. 

If the investment cost per ton per day be taken at $15,000, the 
total investment for a 100-ton plant would be $1,500,000, and a 3 
per cent depreciation charge would amount to $1.45 per ton. On a 
basis of $17,000 per ton per day as an investment, tfie depreciation 
charge would be practically $1.75 per ton of paper. The basis here 
is full production for 310 days in the year. Paper mills do not, as a 
rule, run on Sunday. Pulp mills commonly do. 

If a 3 per cent allowance for depreciation be excessive, the charge 
per ton would, of course, be correspondingly reduced. It should be 
said, furthermore, that unusually high investment of capital per ton 
per day is due primarily to increased cost of hydraulic development 
rather than to equipment, and that on this part of the investment the 
depreciation is practically nil; so that a 3 per cent charge on a total 
investment, of which a relatively large proportion is for power 
development, would be excessive. 

Since we publish figures of mill cost and also figures of prices it is 
necessary to consider briefly the relation between the two in con¬ 
nection with investment. It is not the problem of a board of inquiry 
to consider what is a “reasonable” price or a “reasonable” profit. 
At the same time certain illustrative examples should prove of value. 
The greater the necessary investment for a given value of product, 
the higher must the margin be between mill cost and mill selling 
price. Profit per unit of product means nothing as to profit on 
investment unless the amount of the investment is known. Invest¬ 
ment figures as already shown vary widely. Any of the following 
calculations are purely illustrative and can easily be adjusted to 
different investment estimates. 

If we start, for illustration, with a 100-ton balanced mill, and 
assume (1) investment of $17,000 per ton per day, (2) a full output 
of 31,000 tons per year, (3) a depreciation charge of 3 per cent or $1.75 
per ton, (4) interest on working capital ($3,500 per ton per day), say 
60 cents per ton, if not included in total investment, (5) a margin 
between mill cost and price f. o. b. mill of $10, we should get as a 
result: 

Margin. $10.00 

Less depreciation. $1.75 

Less interest.60 

- 2.35 


7. 65 







PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


75 


On 31,000 tons this would be $237,150 per year, or 13.94 per cent, 
on a total investment of $1,700,000. Keeping the depreciation 
charge constant, as deducted from nominal margin—that is, allow¬ 
ing in no case more than a 3 per cent depreciation on $17,000 per ton 
per day—we should have on the nominal margin of $10 between 
mill cost (less depreciation and interest on working capital) for an 
investment of $17,000 per ton per day, 13.94 per cent on investment; 
$20,000 per ton per day, 11.85 per cent on investment; $25,000 per 
ton per day, 9.40 per cent on investment; $30,000 per ton per day, 
7.90 per cent on investment. 

If the margin is $5, the per cent on investment would be one-half 
the above. On the other hand, if the amount of investment is less, 
such a margin would show greater profits. For example, taking the 
low figure of $14,000 per ton per day (assuming $4,000 for hydraulic 
development and $10,000 for construction and equipment) the earn¬ 
ings on investment would be 17.82 per cent. 

The matter may, perhaps, be made clearer by being put in another 
way. Suppose a well-balanced plant to own its own wood supplies 
and to charge no profit or stumpage on the wood delivered to the 
pulp mills, and no profit on the pulps delivered to the paper mill. 
In other words, suppose the whole profit on the total investment for 
woodlands, hydraulic development, and the three mills to be ex¬ 
tracted from the margin between mill cost of paper and mill price. 
In this case, for purposes of comparison, we may assume that the 
depreciation charge and interest on working capital are charged into 
the mill cost, not of course on the basis of the whole investment, 
including lands, but on a reasonable basis for construction and equip¬ 
ment. In such case a margin of $10 per ton (after allowing for 
depreciation and interest on working capital) would represent on a 
total investment (woodlands included) of— 

Per cent. 


$25,000 per ton per day. 12. 40 

$30,000 per ton per day. 10. 33 

$31,000 per ton per day. 10. 00 

$35,000 per ton per day. 0. 20 


From this it appears that after deducting from mill cost all inter¬ 
mediate profits from wood to pulp, but including depreciation on 
plant, etc., every dollar of margin between cost and price (assuming 
full output) would represent 1 per cent on an investment of $31,000. 

In connection with figures of this kind reference must be made to 
the problem of giving a theoretical cost of production based on an 
ideal plant. In other words, the question may be asked what paper 
ought to be made for. It has been suggested that in lieu of giving 
costs as they are we should name some one figure as a “fair cost” in 
a “typical” or “fair” mill. Any study of cost figures will show that 
such" an estimate would be absolutely unwarranted. We have con¬ 
sidered it our function to collect facts and present them in intelligible 
form. From a consideration of the foregoing tables may be derived 
the actual existing costs of production, with an analysis of items of 
transfer profits, depreciation charges, and the like. If for any reason 
the average under existing conditions is not considered a satisfactory 
basis of comparison, it is perfectly easy to find from the tables not 
only the highest and the lowest, but percentages produced at different 






76 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


costs. The figures of actual cost which we were instructed to obtain 
vary widely, not only between different mills, but in the same mill 
for different periods. At the same time the reader can easily elimi¬ 
nate the small percentages produced at the two extremes and for a 
large part of the industry arrive at cost figures, either total or by 
separate items, within much narrower margins. The data regarding 
wood costs and prices, transfer profits, investment, depreciation, and 
equipment will furnish additional material for estimates of “ reason¬ 
able” cost to those who care to make them. Such estimates are, 
however, purely theoretical. They are naturally made by under¬ 
writers or engineers and the most honest estimates of efficient experts 
are often proved false by the results. In view of these facts w r e have 
held it our obvious duty to avoid theoretical calculations and to give 
the actual costs as we find them under existing conditions. 



S. Doc. 31, 62-1—11. (To face page 76.) 












































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































































Part XI. 

COSTS OF PRODUCTION EXTENDING OVER A SERIES OF YEARS 

It may be of interest to compare the cost of production over a longer 
period than is covered by the general tables in this report. For this 
purpose not all of the establishments’ schedules were available, nor 
did representatives of the board secure these data for all of the estab¬ 
lishments in which they might have been available, owing to the lack 
of time. However, it is possible to show for several plants, and for 
some groups, the costs for a considerable period. The number of 
years covered by the various plants will not be the same, and for this 
reason some will have to be shown separately. Wherever a number 
of plants have been used or combined in one table the same plants 
have been used for each year, that is the statements for each item for 
each year are for identical plants, and where this could not be safely 
done no grouping was attempted but the plant shown on separate 
table. For instance, in the first table which follows a number of 
sulphite-pulp mills from which itemized cost per ton had been secured 
are combined into one table. These costs extend over 9 years, i. e., 
from 1901 to 1909, both inclusive. 


Table 24. — Itemized cost of production per ton of sulphite pulp, by years, 1901-1909. 


Items. 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Material: 










Sulphur. 

$3.24 

$3.24 

$3.32 

$3.15 

$2.97 

$2.87 

$2.81 

$2.74 

$3.01 

Limestone. 








.07 

.11 

Lime. 

.73 

.65 

.69 

.64 

.63 

.57 

.55 

.49 

. 46 

Wood. 

12.74 

13.50 

14.02 

15.51 

16.18 

17.03 

17.75 

21.42 

22.27 

Total. 

16.71 

17.40 

18.02 

19.30 

19.79 

20.47 

21.12 

24.72 

25.90 

Conversion: 










Manufacturing labor. 

3.90 

3.96 

4.26 

4.38 

4.20 

4.19 

4.59 

4.28 

3.60 

Felts. 

.16 

.15 

.16 

.14 

.16 

.17 

.18 

.13 

.09 

Wires. 




.04 

.04 

.04 

.05 

.04 

.04 

Screen plates. 

.16 

.ii 

.08 

.08 

.08 

.12 

.13 

.06 

.09 

Belting. 

.18 

.15 

.15 

.14 

.12 

.10 

.13 

.13 

.13 

Lubricants. 

.06 

.05 

.05 

.06 

.05 

.05 

.06 

.05 

.04 

Repair materials. 

1.45 

1.27 

1.11 

1.35 

1.34 

1.46 

1.57 

1.03 

1.34 

Repair labor. 

.68 

.56 

.55 

.61 

.59 

.59 

.66 

.77 

.82 

Fuel, coal. 

2.18 

2.23 

2.42 

2.22 

2.16 

2.24 

2.31 

2.47 

2.29 

Barn . 



.02 

.03 

.02 

.02 

.02 

.03 

.02 

Miscellaneous operating expenses. 

.13 

.09 

.15 

.20 

.17 

.15 

.15 

.181 

.17 

Office . 



.02 

.01 

.02 

.02 

.02 

.02 

.02 

Water power. 

.10 

.08 

.09 

.12 

.12 

.10 

.09 

.15 

.12 

Total. 

9.00 

8. 67 

9.05 

9.37 

9.09 

9.26 

9.97 

9.33 

8.77 

Direct cost. 

25. 71 

26.07 

27.07 

28.67 

28.87 

29. 72 

31.08 

34.06 

34.68 

Fixed charges, insurance and taxes... 

.01 

.01 

.01 

.02 

.27 

.25 

.24 

.46 

.34 

Total manufacturing cost. 

25.72 

26.08 

27.08 

28.69 

29.14 

29.97 

31.32 

32.52 

35.02 


77 




























































78 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


It will be noted that the increase in total costs from $25.72 per ton 
in 1901 to $35.02 in 1909 is almost exactly equivalent to the increase 
in cost of wood per ton of pulp—i. e., $12.74 in 1901 to $22.27 in 1909. 
No item in the conversion costs, whether of supplies or of labor, have 
varied materially. The manufacturing labor cost in 1909 was lower 
for the average of the mills here considered than in any other year, 
and the total conversion cost is but 10 cents per ton higher in 1909 
($8.77) than it was for the lowest year in the period (1902, $8.67). 

The next table shows itemized cost for a much larger number of 
ground-wood pulp mills for a series of years. The items lor 1900 
could not be satisfactorily secured, and hence are omitted for that 
year. Itemized costs per ton of ground-wood pulp are given from 
1901 to 1909, inclusive. Here, again, the variations relate almost 
entirely to the cost of wood, and the increase in wood cost almost 
exactly equals the advance in total cost. As a matter of fact labor 
conditions had radically changed in most of these pulp mills; wages 
had been increased, reduced, and increased again ; hours of labor had 
been radically reduced, and yet manufacturing labor costs were lower 
at the end of the period (1909) than in the beginning (1901). 

Table 25. —Itemized cost of 'production of ground wood pulp, by years, 1901-1909. 


Items. 

1900 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Material, wood.. 

$6.48 

$6.96 

$7.09 

$7.41 

$8.38 

$8.78 

$9. 08 

$9.50 

$11.14 

$11.82 






Conversion: 

Manufacturing labor. 


2.45 

2. 37 

2. 57 

2. 53 

2. 46 

2. 46 

2. 55 

2.64 

2. 34 

Pnlp stones... 


. 14 

.12 

.11 

.10 

.09 

.10 

.11 

.11. 

.10 

Felts. 


.16 

.12 

.11 

.11 

.12 

.14 

.13 

.10 

.09 

Wires . 



.01 

.03 

.03 

.03 

.04 

.04 

.04 

Screen plates. 


.OS 

.05 

.06 

.06 

.07 

.07 

.05 

.05 

.06 

Belting. 


.10 

.07 

.07 

.07 

.06 

.06 

.07 

.07 

.06 

Lubricants. 


.05 

.04 

.03 

.04 

.04 

.04 

.04 

.04 

.04 

“Repair materials. 


.56 

. 49 

.49 

.61 

.56 

.62 

.77 

.88 

.59 

Repair labor . 


.37 

.29 

.32 

.36 

.30 

.29 

.32 

.41 

.43 

Fuel, ooal . _ .. 


.02 

.01 

.04 

.02 

.01 

.02 

.04 

.03 

Barn... 


.03 

.04 

.03 

.03 

.02 

.03 

.02 

Miscellaneous operating 
expanses .. 


.11 

.10 

.04 

.05 

.06 

.07 

.07 

.16 

.24 

Office . 


.01 

.01 

.02 

.02 

.02 

.02 

.02 

Water power. 


.38 

.34 

.37 

. 36 

.36 

.37 

.40 

.60 

. 45 



Total. 

4.15 

4. 42 

4.01 

4. 25 

4.47 

4. 21 

4.31 

4. 60 

5.19 

4.51 






Direct cost. 

10.63 

11.38 

11.10 

11.66 

12. 85 

12. 98 

13.39 

14.10 

16.34 

16.33 





Fixed charges: 

Insurance, and taxes. 


.04 

.03 

.05 

.07 

.17 

.17 

.15 

.32 

.25 

General expense. 


.09 

.08 

.10 

.11 

.08 

.08 

.09 





Total. 

.21 

.13 

.12 

.15 

.19 

.25 

.25 

.25 

.32 

.25 


Total manufacturing cost 

10.84 

11.51 

11. 22 

11.81 

13.04 

13. 23 

13.64 

14.35 

16.66 

16.58 


Below will be found a table itemizing the cost of production for 
news-print paper per ton, by years, from 1900 to 1909, inclusive. The 
picture here is a composite one; that is, the figures are the average for 
a number of mills, the same plants being used each year. The cost of 
material will be seen here, too, as the varying element, labor costs 
changing little. To the cost of manufacture here has been added 
the cost of marketing and the margin, which must not be confused 
with profit, as margin here means simply the amount per ton left 
with which to pay interest, depreciation, and profits. 







































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 79 


Table 26 .—Cost of 'production per ton of news-print paper, itemized, and by years from 

1900 to 1909, inclusive. 


Items. 

1900 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Material: 











Ground wood. 

$9.54 

$10.00 

$9.41 

$10.24 

$11.50 

$11.08 

$11.49 

$12.22 

$13.33 

$12.92 

Sulphite. 

8.50 

9.02 

8.32 

8.44 

9.34 

8.53 

8.25 

9.05 

10.26 

10.15 

Wrappers. 

.52 

. 76 

.70 

.66 

.70 

.63 

.60 

.56 

.63 

.61 

Fillers. 

.66 

.67 

.57 

.46 

.46 

.49 

.49 

.37 

.34 

.35 

Alum. 

.24 

.27 

.27 

.27 

.25 

.23 

.21 

.19 

.21 

.19 

Bleach chemicals. 

.12 

.10 

.05 

.03 

.03 

.02 

.02 

.01 

.01 

.01 

Color. 

.10 

.10 

.11 

.12 

.13 

. 15 

.16 

.16 

.14 

.14 

Sizing. 

.16 

.15 

.15 

.15 

.16 

.20 

.17 

.16 

.14 

.18 

Total. 

19.84 

21.07 

19.58 

20.37 

22. 63 

21.34 

21.38 

22.71 

25.05 

24.55 

Conversion: 











Manufacturing labor. 

3.80 

, 4.00 

4.11 

4.15 

3.94 

3.83 

3.80 

4.19 

4.35 

3.73 

Felts. 

.57 

.63 

.61 

.56 

.64 

.72 

.76 

.83 

.91 

.81 

Wires. 

.44 

.45 

.38 

.31 

.32 

.32 

.33 

.32 

.34 

.33 

Screen plates. 

.04 

.04 

.03 

.02 

.03 

.02 

.02 

.03 

.02 

.02 

Belting. 

.14 

.15 

.13 

.12 

.12 

.11 

.10 

.11 

.13 

.12 

Lubricants. 

.07 

.07 

.06 

.06 

.06 

.06 

.07 

.08 

.08 

.08 

Finishing material. 

.52 

.44 

.41 

.42 

. 45 

.44 

.45 

.35 

.37 

.36 

Repair material. 

.88 

.85 

.91 

.75 

.89 

.94 

1.01 

1.09 

.99 

1.02 

Repair labor. 

.45 

.62 

.58 

.59 

.59 

. 55 

.49 

.53 

.70 

.65 

Fuel coal. 

2.19 

2.30 

2.34 

2.60 

2.34 

2.22 

2.17 

2.23 

2.29 

2.03 

Barn. 









.03 

.02 

Miscellaneous operating 











expenses. 

.18 

.15 

.13 

.09 

.09 

.10 

' .08 

.09 

.14 

.08 

Office. 




.03 

.03 

.03 

.03 

.02 

.03 

.03 

Water rents. 

.17 

.18 

.16 

.15 

.13 

.13 

.12 

.11 

.16 

.11 

Total.. 

9.44 

9.88 

9.84 

9.85 

9. 65 

9.46 

9.42 

9.96 

10. 54 

9.40 

Direct cost. 

29.28 

30.95 

29.42 

30.22 

32.28 

30.80 

30.80 

32.67 

35.59 

33. 95 

Insurance and taxes. 

.42 

.46 

.44 

.46 

.43 

.30 

.28 

.31 

.51 

.34 

Administration. 

.96 

1.02 

1.26 

1.42 

1.48 

.94 

.86 

.85 

1.25 

.91 

Manufacturing total. 

30. 66 

32.43 

31.12 

32.10 

34.19 

32.04 

31.94 

33. 83 

37.35 

35.20 

Marketing: 











Freight, cartage, and stor- 











age. 

3.40 

3.36 

3.54 

3.68 

3.87 

3.70 

3.89 

3. 67 

3.91 

3.89 

Sales division expenses.... 

.40 

.40 

.38 

.24 

.24 

.23 

.21 

.19 

.28 

.20 

Settlement charges. 

2.40 

2.54 

1.94 

1.54 

.91 

.95 

.70 

.51 

.45 

.29 

Total. 

6. 20 

6.30 

5.86 

5.46 

5.02 

4.89 

4.81 

4.37 

4.64 

4.37 

Total cost delivered. 

36.86 

38.73 

36.98 

37.56 

39.21 

36.93 

36. 75 

38.20 

41.99 

39.57 


Following these are figures for single plants, spread over a series 
of years. In one plant the cost sheets have been transformed into 
a table of relatives which may be illuminating. In this case the 
costs for 1902 are taken as 100 per cent, the other years showing 
a rise or fall in itemized costs in their relation to the cost in 1902. 
That is to say, take the top line, the ground-wood pulp charged 
in this paper mill as $100 in 1902, would cost $121.19 in 1903, 
$101.55 in 1904, etc. The plant buys all of its sulphite pulp. The 
items of labor and salaries are here unfortunately combined, but it 
was ascertained that salaries had remained practically stationary, 
and that wage rates had been increased twice between 1902 and 
1909. The descending scale of relative labor costs is explained by 
the increased production shown on the bottom line. The equipment 
of the plant remained practically identical. 

























































































80 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 27. —Relative cost of 'production of news-print paper for a series oj years, taking 

1902 as representing 100 per cent. 


Items. 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Ground wood. 

100.00 

121.19 

101.55 

107.50 

138.85 

171.08 

169. 53 

151.65 

Sulphite. 

100.00 

81.55 

88.10 

99.27 

107.52 

104. 85 

92.71 

96.84 

Fuel. 

100. 00 

85.72 

77.55 

67.34 

87.75 

111.22 

96. 94 

74.50 

Felts. 

100.00 

91.90 

83.78 

75.41 

78.38 

89.19 

75.67 

78.39 

Wires. 

100.00 

104. 00 

76. 00 

68.00 

60.00 

72.00 

48.00 

64.00 

Alum. 

100.00 

90. 00 

70.00 

70.00 

70.00 

75. 00 

75.00 

65.00 

Clav. 

100. 00 

100.00 

76.47 

76. 47 

70. 59 

76.47 

100.00 

135.29 

Size. 

100.00 

130. 00 

150.00 

220.00 

210.00 

160.00 

240.00 

270. 00 

Oil and light. 

100. 00 

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

100.00 

71.43 

57.14 

Belt... 

ICO. 00 

116. 67 

150.00 

100.00 

66. 67 

83.33 

83.33 

50.00 

Color. 

100.00 

100.00 

140.00 

180.00 

180.00 

200.00 

180.00 

160.00 

Labor and salary. 

100.00 

106.95 

92.38 

84.76 

81.78 

86.42 

90.06 

83.77 

Power rental. 




100. 00 

100.00 

100. 00 

100.00 

100.00 

Repairs. 

100. 00 

118.88 

166.04 

105.66 

150.94 

222.64 

136. 00 

145.30 

Team. 

100.00 

127.55 

127.55 

114.28 

85. 71 

127.55 

142.85 

100.00 

Finishing. 

100. 00 

112.77 

119.15 

108.51 

87.23 

97.87 

110.64 

91.49 

Expense. 

100. 00 

82.35 

129.41 

182.35 

117. 65 

188. 23 

200. 00 

205. 88 

Insurance. 

100.00 

131.25 

137.50 

106.25 

62.50 

87.50 

68.75 

69.35 

Taxes. 

100.00 

100.00 

125.00 

162.50 

175.00 

225.00 

187.50 

287.50 

Total cost. 

100.00 

103.00 

97.49 

98.96 

110.39 

126.36 

112. 99 

112.98 

Price received for 









paper. 

100.00 

105.18 

105.18 

93.26 

92. 75 

103. 63 

107.25 

103.10 

Product (increased).. 

100.00 

102.36 

107.93 

112. 72 

120.29 

121.10 

127.10 

130.81 


The following table is for a plant situated in one of the Lake States 
of the Middle West, and gives in addition to the relative, the actual 
price paid per rough cord for spruce pulp wood from 1902 to 1909. 
Here again, for the purpose of more easy comparison with the pre¬ 
ceding table, we have introduced a line of relatives, based on 1902 
as 100. 


Table 28. — Price , actual and relative, for pulp wood, for a series of years. 


1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

3.15 
100. 00 

3. 40 
107. 93 

3.60 
114. 28 

4.10 
130.16 

5.15 
163. 49 

7.40 
234. 92 

7. 42 
235. 55 

6.60 
209.52 


Continuing the discussion of costs over a series of years, the fol¬ 
lowing table presents the cost per 100 pounds of paper, in cents and 
fractions of cents, over a period of seven years, or from 1903 to 1909, 
inclusive. 

Table 29. —Comparative cost of manufacturing paper. 

[Cost per 100 pounds.] 


Items. 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Ground wood. 

$0.549 

SO. 460 

$0. 487 

80. 629 

80.775 

80.768 

80. 687 

Sulphite. 

.336 

.363 

.409 

.443 

.432 

.382 

.392 

Fuel. 

.084 

.076 

.066 

.086 

.109 

.095 

.073 

Felts. 

.034 

.031 

.028 

.029 

.033 

.028 

.029 

Wires. 

.026 

.019 

.017 

.015 

.018 

.012 

.016 

Alum. 

.018 

.014 

.014 

.014 

.015 

.015 

.013 

Clay. 

.017 

.013 

.013 

.012 

.013 

.017 

.023 

Size. 

.013 

.015 

.022 

.021 

.016 

.024 

.027 

Oil and light. 

.007 

.008 

.007 

.007 

.007 

.005 

.004 

Belt. 

.007 

.009 

.006 

.004 

.005 

.005 

.003 

Color. 

.005 

.007 

.009 

.009 

.010 

.009 

.008 

Labor and salary. 

.323 

.279 

.256 

.247 

.261 

.272 

.253 

Power rental. 



.014 

.013 

. 014 

014 

012 

Repairs. 

.063 

.088 

.056 

.080 

.118 

! 072 

.077 

Team. 

.009 

.009 

.008 

.006 

.009 

.010 

.007 

Finishing. 

.053 

.056 

.051 

.041 

.046 

.052 

.043 

Expenses. 

.014 

.022 

.031 

.020 

.032 

.034 

.035 

Insurance. 

.021 

.022 

.017 

.010 

.014 

.011 

.012 

Taxes. 

.008 

.010 

.013 

.014 

.018 

.015 

.023 


1. 587 

1.501 

1.524 

1.700 

1. 945 

1.840 

1.737 








































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


81 


Costs for one of the eastern plants showing comparatively low cost 
figures are shown for a series of years in the table below. This shows 
that in this plant the low costs were not simply for one year, but that 
a general range of very economic production has been maintained for 
a number of years. 


Table 30. —Cost of specified items in the manufacture of news-print paper per ton of 
paper produced, for years 1906, 1907, 1908, 1909, and 1910. 


Items. 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

1910 

Material: 

Ground wood. 

$9.274 

$12. 202 
8. 530 

$10.958 
10. 223 

$11.545 
9.413 
.014 

$14.105 
9.775 
. 039 

Sulphite. 

7.004 

W aste paper. 

.038 

.037 

.013 

Fillers...!. 

. 470 

.458 

. 443 

. 343 

. 278 

Alum. 

. 175 

.069 

. 143 

. 153 

. 191 

Color. 

. 113 

. 102 

. 097 

. 106 

. 114 

Sizing. 

.161 

.096 

.106 

.118 

.262 


Total. 

17. 236 

21.495 

21.983 

21. 693 

24.764 


Manufacturing labor. 

2.685 

2.668 

2.877 

2.910 

2. 529 


Works expense: 

Felts— 

Wool. 

.343 

.412 

.282 

.265 

.235 

Canvas. 

. 112 

. 192 

.157 

. 122 

.241 

Wires. 

.412 

.402 

.379 

.212 

.233 

Screen plates. 

.019 

.016 

.007 

.044 

. 049 

Belting. 

.032 

.061 

.054 

.058 

. 043. 

Lubricants. 

. 104 

.072 

.089 

.084 

. 103- 

Finishing materials. 

.905 

.868 

.792 

.808 

.708 

Fuel- 

Coal . 

.954 

1.509 

1.402 

1.097 

1.184 

Wood. 

.037 

.013 

.019 

.053 

.010 

Repairs— 

Material. 

.247 

.540 

.480 

.297 

.419 

Labor. 

.297 

.362 

.432 

.367 

.390 

Administration expense. 

1.098 

1.084 

0) 

.165 

1.039 

.655 

Miscellaneous operating expense. 

. 101 

.079 

. 199 

. 187 

Accident insurance. 

.382 

.331 

.237 

.064 

.03? 


Total. 

5.046 

5.943 

4.404 

4. 709 

4.492 


Fixed charges: 

Fire insurance. 

.220 

.030 

.039 

.104 

.020 

Taxes. 

.206 

.415 

.688 

.440 

.322 

% 



Total cost in bulk at works. 

25. 393 

30. 551 

29.991 

29.855 

32.127 

Depreciation. 

.600 

.600 

1.969 

1.742 

1.217 





Total cost including depreciation. 

25. 993 

31.151 

31.960 

31.597 

33.344 



1 Not reported. 


The following table represents the itemized costs per ton of paper, 
in a so-called “balanced plant,” i. e., one making its own pulp, 
both sulphite and ground-wood. The wood costs at this plant are 
high; pulps made at the mill are charged into paper, not at a profit 
but at actual cost of production. Owing to low water, the plant 
bought some ground-wood pulp in 1908 and 1909 (perhaps to a 
lesser degree in other years). These purchases, of course, represent 
some profits. The figures are unrevised and are given as kept 
by the manufacturer. Attention is here called to the fact that 
while between 1900 and 1909 the wages of labor were raised twice, 
and the shift (or hours of labor) changed from 12 and 13 hours to 
8 hours per day, the labor cost per ton of product was lower in the 
two years of high wages and short hours than in the former years 
of long hours and lower wages. 


8. Doc. 31, 62-1-6 






































































82 PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 

Table 31 .—Cost of specified items in the manufacture of news-print paper, per ton of 
paper produced, in a “balanced plant” for given years. 


Items. 

1900 

1901 

1902 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Material: 











Ground wood. 

$8.91 

$10.15 

$9. 35 

$10. 89 

$11.04 

$9.49 

$9.61 

$10. 83 

$13.15 

$14. 27 

Sulphite. 

7.20 

7.50 

6.64 

6.31 

7.59 

7.28 

7.05 

6. 66 

7.46 

7.36 

Wrappers. 

.52 

. 65 

. 58 

. 52 

.46 

.50 

.46 

.59 

.74 

.63 

Fillers. 

1.09 

1.20 

.87 

.49 

.60 

.62 

.44 

.38 

. 36 

.39 

Alum. 

.20 

.27 

.26 

.25 

.26 

. 22 

.18 

.15 

• ii 

.10 

Rlp . a/Vh nhfvrnion.ls 

01 










♦Color. 

.07 

.06 

.08 

.09 

.09 

.11 

.12 

.10 

.u 

.10 

.Sizing 

.08 

.08 

.07 

.08 

. 11 

.06 

.04 















Total. 

18.14 

19.91 

17.85 

18.62 

20.15 

18. 28 

17.91 

18. 72 

21.95 

22.85 

Conversion: 











Manufacturing labor. 

3.53 

3.79 

4.08 

4. 40 

3.81 

3.58 

3.54 

3.43 

3.33 

2. 86 

Felts. 

.69 

.74 

.70 

.75 

.71 

.76 

.79 

.91 

.98 

. 95 

Wires. 

.60 

.58 

.47 

.39 

.37 

.37 

.37 

.38 

.40 

.44 

Screen plates. 

.01 

.02 

.03 

.02 

.01 

.01 

.01 

.03 

.01 

.02 

Belting. 

.22 

.24 

.18 

.17 

.13 

.13 

.11 

.09 

.15 

.11 

Lubricants. 

.06 

.07 

.08 

.07 

.07 

.07 

.11 

.11 

.10 

.08 

Finishing material. 

.41 

.54 

.55 

.61 

.47 

.82 

.64 

.37 

.44 

.29 

Repair material. 

1.45 

1.01 

1.05 

.87 

.73 

.80 

.84 

.75 

1.25 

1.02 

Repair labor. 

.41 

.68 

.49 

.53 

.58 

.63 

. 5() 

.52 

.94 

.60 

Fuel, coal.. 

2. 02 

2.31 

2.89 

2. 62 

2. 42 

2.18 

1.89 

1.83 

1.72 

1.48 

Barn. 




.05 

.03 

.04 

.05 

.02 

.03 

.02 

Miscellaneous operating 











expenses. 

.14 

.14 

.09 

.07 

.05 

.10 

.09 

.07 

.13 

. 05 

Office. 




.01 

.02 

.02 

.02 

.01 

.01 

.01 

Total. 

9.54 

10.12 

10. 61 

10. 58 

9.40 

9.51 

9.04 

8. 52 

9.49 

7. 94 

Direct cost. 

27.68 

30.03 

28.46 

29.20 

29.55 

27.79 

26.95 

27.24 

31.44 

30. 79 

Insurance and taxes. 

.56 

.54 

.54 

. 54 

.47 

.30 

.24 

.24 

.30 

.23 

Administration. 

.96 

1.02 

1.26 

1.42 

1.48 

.94 

.86 

.85 

1.25 

.91 

Manufacturing total. 

29.30 

31.59 

30. 26 

31.16 

31.50 

29.03 

28.05 

28. 33 

32. 99 

31.93 

Freight, cartage, and storage.. 

3. 60 

3.88 

4.34 

4. 44 

4.22 

4. 42 

4. 43 

3.85 

4.26 

4.08 

Sales-division expenses. 

.40 

.40 

.38 

.24 

.23 

.23 

.21 

.19 

.28 

.20 

.Settlement charges. 

2.60 

2. 86 

2.44 

1.44 

1.26 

.78 

1.18 

.71 

.43 

.25 

Marketing total. 

6. 60 

7.14 

7.16 

6.12 

5.71 

5.43 

5. 83 

4.75 

4. 98 

4.53 

'Total cost delivered. 

35.82 

38.73 

37.42 

37.28 

37.23 

34. 46 

33.88 

33.08 

37.97 

36. 47 


Pulp-wood prices control ground-wood pulp costs of course, but 
this is not the only element of control. For instance, in the follow¬ 
ing table the costs per ton of ground-wood pulp are shown in con¬ 
nection with inches of rainfall for five years, showing the influence 
of rainfall on labor cost per ton. Of course the reason for this is 
decreased output owing to lack of water power, without a corre¬ 
sponding decrease in pay roll totals. 


Table 32 .—Comparative cost of manufacturing pulp over a series of years. 

(Cost per ton.) 


Items. 

1903 

1904 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

Wood. 

$6. 85 

$5. 82 

$5. 55 

$8.80 

$11.37 

$9. 44 

$9. 45 

Labor. 

4.09 

3.14 

3.02 

3.53 

4.59 

3.74 

3.63 

Pulp stones. 

.16 

.03 

.......... 

.09 

.05 

.08 

.04 

Felts. 

.12 

.09 

.11 

.12 

.13 

.12 

.15 

Belting. 

.17 

.12 

.10 

.13 

.09 

.11 

.11 

Oil. 

.10 

.08 

.08 

.09 

.11 

.07 

.05 

Power rental. 



1. 68 

1.76 

1 68 

1 70 

1 

Repairs. 

.55 

.47 

.52 

.74 

.76 

1.62 

.81 

Water power. 

.16 

. 12 

.01 





4 








Total. 

12.20 

9.87 

11.07 

15. 26 

18. 78 

16. 88 

15. 99 

Rainfall.inches.. 



30.13 

23.94 

19.47 

22. 25 

21.99 











































































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


83 


Fortunately costs on sulphite and ground-wood pulps, and for 
news-print paper in a Canadian mill can be shown in like manner, 
though for a shorter period, i. e., three years. These tables follow: 

Table 33. —Cost of production of news-print paper in a Canadian mill for 1908, 1909, 

and 1910, per ton of paper produced. 


Items. 


Material: 

Ground wood. 

Sulphite.. 

W aste. 

Clay. 

Alum.. 

Size. 

Color.. 

Total material.. 

Rubber rolls. 

Manufacturing wages. 

Fuel. 

Repair labor. 

Repair material. 

Felts... 

Wires. 

Belting. 

Lubricants. 

Finishing expense. 

Screen plates. 

Miscellaneous. 

General mill material. 

Total conversion. 

Total material and conversion 

Taxes and insurance. 

General expense. 

Paper-mill allowance. 

Total charges and expense.... 

Total cost at mill. 


1908 

1909 

1910 

$9. 23 

$8.94 

$9. 39 

7.03 

7.14 

6.80 

.35 

.24 


.53 

.71 

.50 

.21 

.31 

. 36 

.11 

.24 

.30 

.11 

.12 

.09 

17.58 

17. 70 

17.51 



31 

4.01 

4.01 

3.59 

2. 23 

1.85 

1.59 

1.00 

.90 

.79 

1.24 

.97 

.60 

.08 

.04 

.50 

.49 

.30 

.28 

.15 

.12 

.09 

.09 

.08 

.07 

1.70 

2. 07 

1.05 

.10 

.04 

.02 

.10 

.07 

.05 

.33 

.11 

.09 

12.12 

11.10 

9.69 

29. 70 

28.86 

27. 20 

.14 

.14 

.15 

.93 

.75 

.62 

.00 

.09 

.05 

1.13 

.98 

.82 

30.82 

29. 84 

28.02 


Table 34. —Cost of production of ground-wood pulp in a Canadian mill for 1908, 1909, 

and 1910, per ton of pulp produced. 


Items. 

• 

1908 

1909 

1910 

Rough wood used. 

87.20 

$6. 48 

85.92 

Wood preparing.. 

.57 

.47 

.38 

Logs to mill. 

.46 

.43 

.22 

Log sorting. 

.14 

.16 

.15 


.02 

.03 

.06 

Manufacturing wages. 

1.58 

1.44 

1.39 

Repair labor. 

.37 

.44 

.50 

Repair material. 

.39 

.44 

.34 

Screen plates. 

.12 

.08 

.04 

Belting . 

.05 

.04 

.04 

Tiiibricants . 

.03 

.02 

.02 

Cylinder faces. 

.01 

.02 

.02 

Grindstones. 

.14 

.19 

.13 

Miscellaneous. 

.04 

.05 

.04 

General mill material. 

.14 

.06 

.05 

Total conversion. 

4.06 

3.87 

3.38 

Total stock and conversion. 

11.25 

10.35 

9.25 

Tavp.s and insurance. 

.09 

.08 

.09 

General exnense .. 

.34 

.29 

.25 

Shinning charges . 



.008 

Total charges and expense. 

.43 

.37 

.35 

Total cost at mill. 

11.68 

10.72 

9.60 

































































































84 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 35. —Cost of production of sulphite pulp in a Canadian paper mill for 1908, 1909, 

and 1910 per ton of pulp produced. 


Items. 


Material: 

Rough wood used. 

Sulphur. 

Other material. 

Total material. 

Wood preparing. 

Logs to mill. 

Log sorting. 

Manufacturing wages. 

Fuel. 

Felts. 

Repair labor. 

Repair material. 

Belting. 

Lubricants. 

Screen plates. 

Cylinder faces. 

Miscellaneous. 

General mill material. 

Total conversion. 

Total stock and conversion 

Taxes and insurance. 

General expense. 

Sulphite mill allowance. 

Total charges and expense. 

Total cost at mill. 


1908 

1909 

1910 

§14.57 

§13.13 

§11.99 

2.73 

2.82 

2.72 

.34 

.30 

.31 

17.64 

16.25 

15.02 

1.71 

1.47 

1.18 

.94 

.87 

.45 

.27 

.32 

.32 

3.12 

3.09 

2.92 

2.19 

1.83 

1.56 

.15 

.15 

.12 

.71 

.47 

.48 

.76 

.53 

.53 

.06 

.04 

.05 

.03 

.04 

.02 

.29 

.21 

.19 

.06 

.04 

.04 

.07 

.04 

. 05 

.34 

.13 

.13 

10.70 

9.23 

8.04 

28.34 

25.48 

23.06 

.21 

.22 

.26 

.89 

.73 

.65 

.05 

.04 

.06 

1.15 

.99 

.96 

29.49 

26.47 

24.02 



















































Part XII. 


AMOUNT, VALUE, AND SOURCES OF WOOD PULP IMPORTS INTO 

THE UNITED STATES. 

Like the tariff acts of 1890, 1894, 1897, and 1909, our import statis¬ 
tics distinguish three kinds of wood pulp: Mechanically ground pulp, 
unbleached chemical pulp, and bleached chemical pulp. Considering 
indiscriminately our imports of all three varieties, the relative impor¬ 
tance of the several countries of origin is indicated by the following 
table: 


Table 36 .—Imports of wood pulp of all sorts, according to principal countries of origin , 
for the fiscal years 1909 and 1910, arranged in the order of total value of imports. 


From— 

1909 

1910 


Pounds. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Canada. 

328,807,225 
98,471,958 
76,338,971 
183,918,903 
26,707,915 

$3,406,663 

1,817,080 

1,563,905 

11,317,572 

522,043 

412,356,936 
158,413,690 
125,167,148 
105,550,311 
45,952,674 

$4,224,500 
2,769,288 
2,374,884 
1,640,625 
758,717 

Germany. 

Norway. 

Sweden. 

Other countries. 

Total. 

614,244,972 

8,627,263 

847,440,759 

11,768,014 



1 Excluding mechanically ground wood pulp not given for Sweden in 1909 as of no consequence. 


Not only the figures for the years 1909 and 1910 but those for the 
years preceding 1909 (given in Table 37) indicate that Germany has 
been steadily and rapidly forging to the front as a source of our 
imports of wood pulp. The imports from Germany in 1906 exceeded 
those of 1905 by 28 per cent in value; those of 1907 exceeded those of 
1906 by 92 per cent; those of 1908 exceeded those of 1907 by 77 per 
cent; those of 1909 exceeded those of 1908 by about 20 per cent; and 
those of 1910 exceeded those of 1909 by about 50 per cent. The 
figures for the last six months of 1910 indicate an uninterrupted 
continuance of this remarkable progression. If we consider the 
quantity of our imports of German pulp, instead of their value, the 
rate of progression is even more remarkable. Indeed, Germany is 
now the principal source of our imports of unbleached chemical pulp. 

Canada’s preeminence as a source of our imports of pulp is due to 
the fact that practically all of our imported mechanically ground 
pulp comes from that country, as well as a portion of our imports of 
unbleached chemical pulp. Our imports of unbleached chemical 
pulp, however, have increased with great rapidity since 1908. In 
that year we imported less than $1,500,000 worth, whereas in 1909 
we imported nearly $4,500,000 worth, and in 1910 nearly $6,000,000 
worth of unbleached chemical pulp (see Table 38); and of this total 
Canada furnished in 1909 about 30 per cent, valued at $1,334,820, 
and in 1910 only 21 per cent, valued at $1,241,179. 

Norway, like^ Germany, has been rapidly gaining ground as an 
exporter of pulp to the United States. Our imports from Norway, 

85 






















86 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


however, consist largely of bleached chemical pulp. The changes 
from year to year in the importance of the four principal sources of 
our pulp imports are indicated Table 37. 


Table 37. — Value of imports of wood pulp of all hinds, by years, from the principal 

countries of origin, 1905 to 1910, inclusive. 


From— 

1905 

1906 

1907 

1908 

1909 

1910 

Canada. 

Germany. 

Norway. 

Sweden.. 

Other countries... 

Total. 

$2.669,000 
350,000 
912,000 
396,000 
174,000 

$2,503,000 
451,000 
979.000 
461,000 
191,000 

$3,230,000 
858,000. 
1,374,000 
499,000 
388,000 

$3,198,000 
1,517,000 
952,000 
1,060,000 
586,000 

$3,407,000 
1,817,000 
1,564,000 
1,318,000 
' 522,000 

$4,224,000 
2,769,000 
2,375,000 
1,641,000 
759,000 

4,501,000 

4,585,000 

6,349,000 

7,313,000 

8,627,000 

11,768,000 


IMPORTS OF UNBLEACHED CHEMICAL PULP. 

If we differentiate the total imports of pulp, and consider each of 
the three kinds reported separately since 1908, it appears that the 
exporting nations rank differently, according to whether we consider 
mechanically ground pulp, bleached chemical pulp, or unbleached 
chemical pulp. The most important of the three varieties is un¬ 
bleached chemical pulp, the imports of which in 1909 and 1910 
amounted to approximately one-half our total imports of pulp. Of 
unbleached chemical pulp the imports in 1910 amounted to 374,576,- 
834 pounds, valued at $5,831,016. The principal countries of origin, 
as indicated in Table 38, were Germany, Sweden, Canada, and 
Norway. Germany furnished approximately one-third of the total 
imports and Sweden about one-fourth of the total imports of 
unbleached chemical pulp. 

Table 38. —Imports of unbleached chemical wood pulp for the fiscal years 1909 and 1910. 


[Duty, one-sixth of 1 cent per pound, dry weight.] 


From— 

1909 

1910 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Germany. 

77,496,148 
79,430,719 
74,367,341 
20,096,284 
17,549,965 

$1,298,682 
1,207,870 
1,334,821 
330,917 
306,613 

116,266,741 

95,780,715 

75,446,109 

53,043,548 

34,039,721 

$1,826,268 

1,422,926 

1,241,179 

825,399 

515,244 

Sweden. 

Canada. 

Norway. 

Other countries 1 . 

Total. 

268,940,457 

4,478,903 

374,576,834 

5,831,016 



1 Of the “Other countries,” European Russia is becoming important. In 1909 we imported from Euro¬ 
pean Russia 6,713,918 pounds, valued at $125,405. 


IMPORTS OF BLEACHED CHEMICAL PULP. 

Next in importance to our imports of unbleached chemical pulp 
are those of bleached chemical pulp, which amounted during the 
fiscal year 1910 to 153,515,933 pounds, valued at $3,394,273. 
Approximately half of this total came from Norway and was valued 
at $1,544,407. Approximately one-fourth came from Germany— 
41,639,963 pounds,. valued at $936,247. Of the remaining fourth, 
the largest portion is furnished by Canada, which sent us 19,345,312 
pounds, valued at $460,038. (See Table 39.) 














































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 87 

Table 39. — Imports of bleached chemical wood pulp for the fiscal years 1909 and 1910'.. 


[Duty, one-fourth of 1 cent per pound, dry weight.] 


From— 

1909 

1910 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Norwav. 

46,043,771 
20,SSG, 461 
4,607,983 
4,488.184 
8,998,947 

$1,128,958 
517,738 
120,162 
109,702 
213,923 

71,652,708 

41,639,963 

19,345,312 

9,288,062 

11,589,888 

$1,544,407' 
936,247 
460,038 
213,262 
240,319 

German v. 

Canada... 

Sweden. 

Other countries 1 . 

Total. 

85,025,346 

2,090,483 

153,515,933 

3,394,273 



1 Of the “Other countries,” Finland is acquiring importance as an exporter of pulp; for in 1909 we im¬ 
ported from European Russia (mainly Finland) 6,464,334 pounds, valued at $155,664. 


IMPORTS OF MECHANICAL PULP. 

# 

Our imports of mechanically ground pulp amounted in 1910 to 
over 319,000,000 pounds, valued at $2,542,725. Far and away the 
most important country of origin was Canada, which furnished 
almost the entire amount of our imports of mechanically ground wood 
pulp, the other countries being insignificant in this regard. (See 
Table 40.) 

Table 40. —Imports of mechanically ground icood pulp for the fiscal years 1909 and 1910\. 


[Free when imported from countries that have free and unrestricted exportation; otherwise a duty of one- 

twelfth of 1 cent per pound, dry weight, is imposed.] 


From— 

1909 

1910 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Canada. 

249,831,901 

$1,951,680 

317,565,515 

$2,523,283- 

Germany. 

89,349 

660 

506,986 

6,773 

Sweden!. 

Not given. 

Not given. 

481,534 

4,437 

Norway. 

10,198,916 

104,030 

470,892 

5,078- 

Other countries. 

159.003 

1,507 

323,065 

3,154 

Total. 

260,279,169 

2,057,877 

319,347,992 

2,542,725 


Inasmuch as part of our imports of mechanically ground wood pulp 
is subject to duty and the remainder free, Table 41 has been added 
to indicate the relative importance in 1910 of the dutiable and free 
imports of this kind of pulp. 


Table 41.— Imports of mechanically ground wood pulp in 1910 , dutiable and free of duty 


From— 

Free of duty. 

Dutiable. 

Total. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Pounds. 

Value. 

Canada. 

Germany. 

Sweden.. 

Norway... 

Other countries. 

157,347,856 

300,800 

56,000 

410,860 

233,412 

$1,203,153 

4,637 

737 

4,197 

2,254 

160,217,659 
206,186 
425.534 
60,032 
89,653 

$1,320,130 

2,136 

3,700 

881 

900 

317,565,515 
506,986 
481,534 
470,892 
323,065 

$2,523,283 
6,773. 
4,437 
5,078- 
3,154 

Total. 

158,348,928 

1,214,978 

160,999,064 

1,327,747 

319,347,992 

2,542,725- 

















































































88 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


PRICES OF IMPORTED CHEMICAL PULP IN 1910. 

Whereas our imports of mechanically ground pulp come almost 
exclusively from Canada, Europe sends us almost exclusively chem¬ 
ical pulp. Our imports from Europe, in fact, consist very largely of 
bleached and unbleached sulphite pulp, and of a smaller quantity of 
unbleached sulphate pulp, there being practically no market in this 
country for imported bleached sulphate, and the importation of 
mechanically ground pulp from Europe being uncommon. It should 
be added that from Germany and Holland we import an inconsid¬ 
erable quantity of straw pulp. 

An investigation recently made by the Tariff Board among the 
principal pulp-importing concerns of the United States disclosed the 
fact that the imported chemical pulps vary greatly in price—some of 
the bleached sulphites in particular selling in this country at prices 
considerably in excess of those obtained for bleached sulphite of Amer¬ 
ican manufacture. This is notably the case with regard to certain 
high-grade bleached sulphites. It appears that the grading of 
pulp is made with considerable care in Europe, and that in some 
instances the sulphite pulp designated abroad as No. 1 is superior to 
the grade similarly designated by some manufacturers of pulp in the 
United States. It may be said that certain varieties of imported 
pulp, notably the high-grade bleached sulphites, have no serious com¬ 
petition in the United States. 

Imported sulphate pulp prepared by digesting wood with a mix¬ 
ture of sulphate of soda, caustic soda, and sulphide of soda is often 
miscalled soda pulp. Soda pulp is prepared by digesting wood— 
usually poplar wood—with caustic soda, and figures in our export 
trade but not among our imports. 

The following table concerning the purchase prices and the selling 
prices of imported European chemical pulp for the calendar year 1910 
were taken from the books of several American importers whose 
total sales of chemical pulp aggregated about 120,000 long tons in 
that year. It should be noted that the purchase price—the price 
paid by the importer—is almost invariably quoted c. i. f. New York, 
Philadelphia, Newport News, or other Atlantic seaport; that fre¬ 
quently this price is subject to discount if paid in less than 90 days; 
and that from the price quoted to the American importer there must 
be deducted, to get the net price to the manufacturer, the selling 
charges, packing, insurance, brokerage, inland freight to the European 
port of shipment, consular fees, and ocean freight. Upon the 
arrival of the pulp in New York or other Atlantic seaport, the duty 
and incidental dock and customhouse charges are then paid as a 
rule by the importer, and added, together with his profit, to deter¬ 
mine the selling price ex dock Atlantic seaport. Should the price 
be quoted for goods delivered at the paper mill, the actual freight is 
usually added. Generally, however, the quoted price is ex dock New 
York or other Atlantic seaport, and for purposes of comparison all 
selling prices quoted in the following table have been reduced to an 
ex dock Atlantic seaport basis: 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


89 


Table 42 . — Prices paid and received for chemical pulp imported from Europe in 1910. 

{Based on information furnished the Tariif Board by importers whose total imports of pulp from Europe 
constitute 59 per cent of the chemical pulp imported into the United States from Europe in 1910.] 


Kind and grade of pulp. 

Im¬ 

port¬ 

ers. 

Countries of origin. 

Prices paid by the 
importers. 

Selling prices. 

Highest 
price 
per 100 
pounds, 
exclud¬ 
ing 
duty, 
c. i. f. 
Atlan¬ 
tic sea¬ 
port. 

Lowest 
price 
per 100 
pounds, 
exclud¬ 
ing 
duty, 
c. i. f. 
Atlan¬ 
tic sea¬ 
port. 

Aver¬ 
age 
price 
per 100 
pounds, 
exclud¬ 
ing 
duty, 
c. i. f. 
Atlan¬ 
tic sea¬ 
port. 

Range of 
selling 
prices, 
duty paid, 
per 100 
pounds, 
ex dock, 
Atlantic 
seaport. 

Usual 
selling 
price, 
duty 
paid, 
per 100 
pounds, 
ex 

dock, 
Atlan¬ 
tic sea¬ 
port. 

Unbleached sulphite 

0 

Norway and Sweden.. 




$1.925-$2.22 

$2.00 

No. 1. 







Do. 

A 

Sweden and Hungary. 

$2,117 

$1,711 

$1.715 

1. 925- 2.10 

2.00 

Do. 

M 

Sweden and Norway.. 

1.718 

1.562 

1.61 

1. 75 - 2.05 

2.00 

Do. 

L 

.do. 

1.629 

1.548 

1.60 

1. 90 - 2.10 

1.95 

Do. 

P 

.do. 




1.825- 2. 00 

1.95 

Do. 

G 

Sweden and Finland.. 

1.81 

1.589 

1.688 

1.825- 2. 05 

1.95 

Unbleached sulphite 

C 

Sweden and Austria... 

1.71 

1.58 

1.655 

1.765- 1.925 

1.85 

No. 2. 








Do. 

0 

Austria. 




1. 80 - 2. 075 

1.90 

Do. 

F 

Sweden and Norway.. 

i. 67 

1.38 

1.545 

1.55 - 1.90 

1.80 

Unbleached sulphite 

D 

.do. 

1.52 

1.33 

1.38 

1.65 - 1.84 

1.72 

No. 3. 








Do. 

P 

.do. 




1.525- 1.85 

1.70 

Do. 

o 

Austria. 




1. 45 - 1.975 

1.725 

Do. 

K 

Sweden and Austria... 

1.40 

1.34 

1.37 

1.495- 1.73 

1.54 

Bleached sulphite No. 1 

R 

Austria. 



2. 41 


2.90 

Do. 

A 

Sweden and Norway.. 

2.607 

2.173 

2. 328 

2. 70 - 2.90 

2. 75 

Do. 

E 

.do. 



2.18 

2.45 - 2. 875 

2.60 

Do 

H 

Germany. 



2.613 


2.975 

Bleached sulphite No. 2. 

A 

Sweden and Norway.. 

2.444 

2. 2365 

2.243 

2.60 - 2. 80 

2.60 

Do 

P 

.do. 




2.40 - 2. 70 

2. 525 

Do.. 

G 

.do. 

2.2267 

2. 01 

2.092 

2.45 - 2.60 

2.50 

Do 

B 

Germany. 

. 


2.124 


2.50 

Do. 

G 

Sweden and Norway.. 

2. 254 

1.955 

2.037 

2.35 - 2. 55 

2.40 

Do 

M 

.do. 



2.00 

2. 36 - 2. 52 

2. 45 

\f i tse.h e.rlieh snluhit.e. 

0 

Germany. 




2.025- 2.475 

2.05 

unbleached. 








Do 

L 

.do . 

1.684 

1.625 

1.64 

1. 865- 2. 02 

1.97 

Afit.seherlieh snluhit.e 

P 

.do. 




2. 90 - 3. 00 

2. 95 

bleached. 








Bitter TTellner snluhit.e. 

P 

do 




2. 05 - 2.15 

2.05 

unbleached. 








Ritter Kellner sulphite, 

Q 

.do . 




2. 575- 2.975 

2.75 

bleached. 








TinQiil nh 51 t.P. 

G 

Sweden and Norwav. 




1.70 - 2.075 

2.00 

No. 1. 

Do . 

N 

Sweden and Finland.. 

1.629 

1.52 

1.545 

1.825- 2. 025 

1.85 

Do 

K 

Sweden . 

1.72 

1.53 

1.538 

1.65 - 1.92 

1.82 

Do 

L 

.do . 

1.643 

1.50 

1.575 

1.93 - 2. 03 

1.98 

Unbleached sulphate 

D 

. do . 

1.36 

1.329 

1.343 

1.165- 1.72 

1.72 

No. 2. 








Bleached sulphate No. 1 . 

0 

Sweden and Norway.. 




2. 40 - 2. 80 

2. 50 
































































































Part XIII. 


WAGES AND HOURS OF LABOR IN THE PULP AND PAPER 

INDUSTRY. 

(a) CLASSIFICATION OF WAGES, BY SPEED AND SIZE OF MACHINES, 

ALLOTMENT OF TASK, ETC. 

Rates of wages in many occupations depend on the productivity 
of the labor performed, or, as in the case of machine help, on the speed 
of the machine, width of trimmed roll, etc. 

A classification scheme quite general in its application in eastern 
mills is herewith presented for 1910. While all the rates, grades, and 
classifications presented would not be found in any one mill, each is 
found in some mill. 

Not all the employees are affected by this “sliding scale ’’; it applies 
in fact only to the principal occupations as a rule. For instance, in 
pulp mills, only the head grinderman has his rate per hour fixed upon 
the normal production of the plant; the grindermen and the block 
handlers have a flat rate. In the sulphite plants the acid maker, cook, 
and first assistant cook have a 11 sliding scale” based upon production. 
In the paper mill the machine tender, back tender, or second hand, 
and occasionally the third hand, have an hourly rate based upon 
speed of machine in feet per minute and the width of trim of finished 
roll; as these factors determine the tons produced it amounts, of 
course, to a wage rate based on normal tonnage capacity. Bonus and 
premium plans based on production in excess of normal is likewise 
paid to the leading occupations only when bonuses prevail. That is 
to say, on a Fourdrinier which is rated at 40 tons per day $1 per ton 
bonus is paid for output in excess of 40 tons, but this bonus is divided 
only between machine tender and back tender. 

With this as a key to these rate classifications, it is believed that 
anyone sufficiently interested can use the following tables. In so far 
as the matter of organized labor is pertinent to this question, it should 
be stated that less than a dozen nev r s-print paper plants in the United 
States, and these all in the Eastern States, have written and signed 
wage agreements with the unions; but in practically all plants where 
this classification and these rates obtain, an unwritten understanding 
and tacit arrangement exists with union labor without going to the 
extent of official recognition of it. 

90 



PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


91 


Table 43. — Wood piling: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage of 
rough cords 
daily. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

40 

9 

$0. 21 

$1.89 

8 

$0. 24 

$1.92 


B 

40 

80 

9 

.22 

1.98 

8 

.25 

2.00 


C 

80 

120 

9 

.23 

2.07 

8 

.26 

2.08 


1) 

120 

160 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 


E 

160 

200 

9 

.25 

2. 25 

8 

.28 

2.24 


F 

200 

240 

9 

.26 

2.34 

8 

.29 

2.32 

Head niler. 

G 

240 

280 

9 

.27 

2. 43 

8 

.30 

2.40 


H 

280 

320 

9 

.28 

2. 52 

8 

.31 

2. 48 


I 

320 

360 

9 

.29 

2.61 

8 

.32 

2. 56 


J 

360 

400 

9 

.30 

2. 70 

8 

.33 

2.64 


K 

400 

440 

9 

.31 

2. 79 

8 

.34 

2.72 


L 

440 

480 

9 

.32 

2. 88 

8 

.35 

2.80 


. M 

480 

• 520 

9 

.33 

2. 97 

8 

. 36 

2.88 

Wood handler. 




9 

. 19 

1.71 

8 

. 22 

1 76 

Convevor man. 




9 

. 19 

] 71 

8 

22 

1 76 

Conveyor bov. 




9 

. 15 

1 35 

8 

.18 

1.44 

Scaler".". 




9 

.21 

1. 89 

River man. 




9 

. 20 

1. 80 

8 

.23 

1.84 


f A 

0 

100 

9 

.23 

2. 07 

8 

.26 

2.08 

Engineer. 

B 

100 

200 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 


1 c 

200 

300 

9 

.25 

2. 25 

8 

.28 

2.24 

Teamster. 




10 

.19 

1.90 




Water boy. 




9 

.15 

1.35 

8 

.18 

1.44 


The head piler and the engineer is classified according to the average number of rough cords he has 
charge of piling (or handling) per day. If wood is piled by tour work, his class is determined by the 
amount of rough wood handled per tour. 


Table 44.— Wood handling: 1910. 


Occupations 

Class. 

Tonnage of 
rough cords 
daily. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 
* per 
hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

40 

9 

$0.22 

$1.98 

8 

$0.25 

$2.00 


B 

40 

80 

9 

.22 

1.98 

8 

.25 

2.00 


C 

80 

120 

9 

.23 

2.07 

8 

.26 

2.08 


D 

120 

160 

9 

.23 

2.07 

8 

.26 

2.08 


E 

160 

200 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 


F 

200 

240 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 

Head wood handler. 

G 

240 

280 

9 

.25 

2.25 

8 

.28 

2. 24 


H 

280 

320 

9 

.25 

2. 25 

8 

.28 

2.24 


I 

320 

360 

9 

.26 

2.34 

8 

.29 

2.32 


J 

360 

400 

9 

.26 

2. 34 

8 

.29 

2.32 


K 

400 

440 

9 

.27 

2. 43 

8 

.30 

2.40 


L 

440 

480 

9 

.27 

2. 43 

8 

.30 

2.40 


M 

480 

520 

9 

.28 

2. 52 

8 

.31 

2.48 

Wood handler. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1. 76 

finnye.yftr man. 




9 

.19 

1. 71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Snnlpr 




9 

.21 

1.89 




SI in man. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

HPpamQt.pr 




10 

.19 

1.90 




Conveyer boy. 




9 

.15 

1.35 

8 

.18 

1. 44 


The head wood handler is classified according to the number of rough cords he has charge of handling 
per day, this number being the normal amount of wood consumed by the mill. If tour work, his class is 
determined by cords handled per tour. 























































































92 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 45.— Wood room: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage of 
rough cords 
daily. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

40 

9 

$0.23 

$2.07 

8 

$0.26 

82.08 


B 

40 

80 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 


C 

80 

120 

9 

.25 

2. 25 

8 

.28 

2.24 


D 

120 

160 

9 

.26 

2.34 

8 

.29 

2.32 


E 

160 

200 

9 

.27 

2.43 

8 

.30 

2.40 


F 

200 

240 

9 

.28 

2. 52 

8 

.31 

2.48 

Head preparer. 

G 

240 

280 

9 

.29 

2. 61 

8 

.32 

2.56 


H 

280 

320 

9 

.30 

2. 70 

8 

.33 

2.64 


I 

320 

360 

9 

.31 

2. 79 

8 

.34 

2.72 


J 

360 

400 

9 

.32 

2.88 

8 

.35 

2.80 


K 

400 

440 

9 

.33 

2.97 

8 

.36 

2.88 


L 

440 

480 

9 

.34 

3.06 

8 

.37 

2.96 


M 

480 

520 

9 

.35 

3.15 

8 

.38 

3.04 

Wood handler. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Conveyor men. 




9 

. 19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Sawyer. 




9 

.21 

1.89 

8 

.24 

1. 92 

Barker. 




9 

.20 

1.80 

8 

.23 

1.84 

Splitter. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Chipper. 




9 

.20 

1.80 

8 

.23 

1.84 

Chip bin. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Knotter. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Waste handler. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 


The head preparer is classified according to the number of rough cords he has charge of preparing per - 
day, this number being the normal amount of wood consumed by the mill. If tour work, his class is 
determined by cords prepared per tour. 


Table 46.— Grinders: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

20 

9 

80.21 

$1.89 

8 

80.24 

81. 92 


B 

20 

40 

9 

.22 

1.98 

8 

.25 

2.00 


C 

40 

60 

9 

.23 

2.07 

8 

.26 

2.08 


D 

60 

80 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 


E 

80 

100 

9 

.25 

2.25 

8 

.28 

2.24 


F 

100 

120 

9 

.26 

2. 34 

8 

.29 

2. 32 

Head grinderman. 

G 

120 

140 

9 

.27 

2.43 

8 

.30 

2.40 


H 

140 

160 

9 

.28 

2.52 

8 

.31 

2.48 


I 

160 

180 

9 

.29 

2. 61 

8 

.32 

2. 56 


J 

180 

200 

9 

.30 

2. 70 

8 

.33 

2.64 


K 

200 

220 

9 

.31 

2. 79 

8 

.34 

2. 72 


L 

220 

240 

9 

.32 

2.88 

8 

.35 

2.80 


M 

240 

260 

9 

.33 

2. 97 

8 

.36 

2.88 

Grinderman: 










Paper plants. 







8 

. 23 

1 84 

Pulp mills. 







8 

.22 

1.76 

Block handler: 







Paper plants. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

22 

1 7fi 

Pulp mills. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.21 

1.68 


The head grinderman is classified by the normal production of ground-wood mills. 
















































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


93 


Table 47.— Ground-wood screens: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Screenman: 

Paper plants. 







8 

8 

8 

8 

$0.23 
.22 

.22 

.21 

SI. 84 
1.76 

1.76 

1.68 

Pulp mills. 







Sliverman: 

Paper plants. 







Pulp mills. 















Table 48.— Ground-wood presses: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


f A 

0 

80 

9 

$0.22 

$1.98 

8 

$0.25 

$2.00 

Head pressman. 

i B 

80 

160 

9 

.23 

2.07 

8 

.26 

2.08 


c 

160 

240 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 

Pressmen: 










Paper plants. 







8 

.23 

1.84 

Pulp mill. 







8 

.22 

1.76 

Deckerman. 







8 

.23 

1.84 












The head pressman is classified according to the normal production of ground-wood mills. 


Table 49 .—Acid plant: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Sulphur burner. 







8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

$0.22 
.28 
.29 
.30 
.31 
.22 

$1.76 
2.24 
2.32 
2.40 
2.48 
1.76 

Acid maker. 

A 

B 

C 

D 

0 

40 

80 

120 

40 

80 

120 

160 

9 

9 

9 

9 

$0.25 

.26 

.27 

.28 

$2.25 
2.34 
2.43 
2.52 

Lime slaker. 

Lime handler. 




9 

9 

.19 

.19 

1.71 

1.71 

Tfiwprman__... 















The acid maker is classified according to the normal production of the sulphite mill. 
































































































94 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 50. — Digesters: 1910. 




Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

Occupations. 

Class. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

20 




8 

$0.31 

$2.48 


B 

20 

40 




8 

.32 

2. 56 


c 

40 

60 




8 

.33 

2.64 

Coo V. . 

D 

60 

80 




8 

.34 

2. 72 


E 

80 

100 




8 

.35 

2.80 


F 

100 

120 




8 

.36 

2.88 


G 

120 

140 




8 

.37 

2.96 


A 

0 

20 




8 

.23 

1.84 


B 

20 

40 




8 

.24 

1.92 


c 

40 

60 




8 

.25 

2.00 

First, helper. . 

D 

60 

80 




8 

.26 

2.08 


E 

80 

100 




8 

.27 

2.16 


F 

100 

120 


. 


8 

.28 

2.24 


G 

120 

140 




8 

.29 

2.32 

Second helper. 





8 

.22 

1.76 

B1 ow-pi t. m an. 







8 

.22 

1.76 









Cooks and first helpers are classified according to the normal production of the sulphite mill. There is to 
be 1 cook per shift in each mill. 

Table 51. — Sulphite screens: 1910. 


Occupation. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Screen man. 







8 

SO. 23 

$1.64 









Table 52. — Sulphite presses: 1910. 


Tonnage. 


Day work. 


Tour work. 


Occupations. 


Head pressman 


Pressman... 
Decker man 


Class. 


From— 


A 

0 

B 

20 

C 

40 

D 

60 

E 

80 

F 

100 

G 

120 

H 

140 


To- 


20 

40 

60 

80 

100 

120 

140 

160 


Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

9 

$0.22 

$1.98 

8 

$0.25 

$2.00 

9 

.23 

2.07 

8 

.26 

2.08 

9 

.24 

2.16 

8 

.27 

2.16 

9 

.25 

2.25 

8 

.28 

2.24 

9 

.26 

2.34 

8 

.29 

2.32 

9 

.27 

2.43 

8 

.30 

2.40 

9 

.28 

2.52 

8 

.31 

2.48 

9 

.29 

2. 61 

8 

.32 

2. 56 

9 

.20 

1.80 

8 

*23 

1.84 




8 

.23 

1.84 


The head pressman is classified according to the normal production of the sulphite mill. 









































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


95 


Table 53.— Beaters: 1910 . 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

40 

9 

$0.27 

$2.43 

8 

$0.30 

$2.40 


B 

40 

SO 

9 

.28 

2.52 

8 

.31 

2.48 


C 

80 

120 

9 

.29 

2.61 

8 

.32 

2. 56 

Head beaterman. 

D 

120 

160 

9 

.30 

2.70 

8 

.33 

2.64 


E 

160 

200 

9 

.31 

2.79 

8 

.34 

2.72 


F 

200 

240 

9 

.32 

2. 88 

8 

.35 

2.80 


G 

240 

280 

9 

.33 

2.97 

8 

.36 

2.88 

Beaterman. 







8 

.23 

1.84 

Clay and size man. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 


The head beaterman is classified according to the normal production of the paper mill. 


Table 54. —Paper machines: 1910. 




Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

Occupations. 

Class. 

F torn— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 






8 

$0.40 

$3.20 


B 



. 



8 

.41 

3.28 


c 






8 

.42 

3.36 


D 






8 

.43 

3.44 


E 






8 

.44 

3.52 


F 






8 

.45 

3.00 

Machine tender.. 

G 






8 

.46 

3.68 


H 






8 

.47 

3.76 


I 






8 

.48 

3.84 


J 






8 

.49 

3. 92 


K 






8 

.50 

4.00 


L 






8 

.51 

4.08 


M 






8 

.52 

4.16 


N 






8 

.53 

4.24 


A 






8 

.24 

1.92 


B 

c 






8 

.25 

2.00 







8 

.26 

2.08 


D 






8 

.27 

2.16 


E 






8 

.28 

2.24 


F 






8 

.29 

2.32 

Second hand. 

G 






8 

.30 

2.40 

H 

I 






8 

.31 

2.48 
2.56 







8 

.32 


J 






8 

.33 

2.64 


K 






8 

.34 

2.72 


L 






8 

.35 

2.80 


M 






8 

.36 

2.88 


N 






8 

.37 

2.96 









Machines running on wrappers permanently pay 3 cents per hour less than above for machine tenders 
and back tenders. 































































































96 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 55. —Paper machines: 1910. 




Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

Occupations. 

Class. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


(!) 






8 

$0.23 

$1.84 


(2) 






8 

.23 

1.84 


3 






8 

.24 

1.92 

Third hand. 

- K 






8 

.25 

2.00 


L 






8 

.26 

2.08 


M 






8 

.27 

2.16 


N 






8 

.28 

2. 24 

Fourth hand. 







8 

.23 

1.84 

Fifth hand. 







8 

.22 

1. 76 

Sixth hand. 






8 

.22 

1.76 



1 





1 Classes A to D, inclusive. 

2 Classes E to J, inclusive (3 men on machine), 
s Classes E to J, inclusive (4 men on machine). 


Table 56. —Basis for classes. 


Classes. 

Speed under 
300 feet per 
minute. 

Speed, 300 to 
400 feet per 
minute. 

Speed, 400 to 
500 feet per 
minute. 

Speed, 500 feet 
per minute and 
upward. 

Trim. 

Trim. 

Trim. 

Trim. 

From— 

To— 

From— 

To— 

From— 

To— 

From— 

To— 


Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

Inches. 

A. 

50 

60 

40 

50 

30 

40 

20 

30 

B. 

60 

70 

50 

60 

40 

50 

30 

40 

C. 

70 

80 

60 

70 

50 

60 

40 

50 

D. 

80 

90 

70 

80 

60 

70 

50 

60 

E. 

90 

100 

80 

90 

70 

80 

60 

70 

F. 

100 

110 

90 

100 

80 

90 

70 

80 

G. 

110 

120 

100 

110 

90 

100 

80 

90 

H. 

120 

130 

110 

120 

100 

110 

90 

100 

I. 

130 

140 

120 

130 

110 

120 

100 

110 

J. 

140 

150 

130 

140 

120 

130 

110 

120 

K. 

150 

160 

140 

150 

130 

140 

120 

130 


160 

170 

150 

160 

140 

150 

130 

140 


170 

180 

160 

170 

150 

160 

140 

150 


180 

190 

170 

180 

160 

170 

150 

160 
























































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


97 


Table 57.— Finishing: 1910. 




Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

Occupations. 

Class. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

40 

9 

80.25 

$2.25 





B 

40 

80 

9 

.27 

2.43 




Head finisher. 

C 

80 

120 

160 

9 

.29 

2.61 




D 

120 

9 





.31 

2.79 





E 

1G0 

200 

9 

.33 

2.97 





F 

200 

240 

9 

.35 

3.15 




Roll finisher. 


9 

.20 

1.80 





\ A 



9 

.22 

1.98 




Sheet finisher. 

J B 



9 

.23 

2.07 





1 c 



9 

.24 

2.16 




Counter: 

Man. 




9 

.19 

1.71 




Girl. 




9 

. 14 

1.26 




Cutter: 

Man. 




9 

.20 

1.80 




Girl. 




9 

.14 

1.26 




Rewinder. 




9 

.19 

1.71 





i A 



9 

.22 

1.98 




Weigher. 

\ B 



9 

.23 

2.07 





1 c 



9 

.24 

2.16 




Marker. 




9 

.20 

1.80 




First baler. 




9 

.20 

1.80 




Baler. 




9 

.19 

1.71 




Caser. 




9 

.19 

1.71 












The head finisher is classified according to the normal production of paper mills. If the mill makes 
sheets the grade of the head finisher can be advanced one class. Sheet finishers and weighers are classified 
according to efficiency. 


Table 58 .—Indoor miscellaneous: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To- 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

0 

40 

9 

$0.22 

$1.98 





B 

40 

80 

9 

.23 

2.07 





C 

80 

120 

9 

.24 

2.16 




Head paper loader 

D 

120 

160 

9 

.25 

2.25 





E 

160 

200 

9 

.26 

2.34 





F 

200 

240 

9 

.27 

2. 43 




* 

G 

240 

280 

9 

.28 

2.52 




Paper loader 




9 

.20 

1.80 




Stock handler: 










Paper plants. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

$0.22 

$1.76 

Pulp mills. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

' .21 

1.68 

Weigher. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

f!n.r man 




9 

.19 

1.71 




Oil keeper 




9 

.20 

1.80 




Oiler . 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Cleaner 




9 

.19 

1.71 




Filter man . 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

"NTiphit. watchman 




13 

.20 

2.60 




Snnrlav watchman 




11 

.22 

2. 42 




TC levator man. 




9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Pelt man . 




9 

.19 

1.71 








9 

.20 

1.80 




P.nre Meaner 




9 

.19 

1.71 




fiamnler 




9 

.19 

1.71 




Stock saver . 

. 



9 

.19 

1.71 

8 

.22 

1.76 

First power-house man. 




9 

.34 

3.06 

8 

.37 

2.96 

SeermH nower-hoiise man 







8 

.28 

2.24 





9 

.22 

1.98 















The head paper loader is classified according to the normal production of paper mill. 


S. Doc. 31, 62-1-7 





















































































































































98 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 59. —Outdoor miscellaneous: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Flours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Ilours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Racks. 




9 

9 

10 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

$0.19 

.20 

.19 

.20 

.21 

.22 

.23 

.24 

.25 

.19 

.19 

$1.71 
1.80 
1.90 
1.80 
1.89 
1.98 
2.07 
2.16 
2. 25 
1. 71 
1.71 

8 

$0. 22 

$1.76 

Barn boss. 




Tp.amstor 







First laborer. 

Laborer. 

A 

B 

C 

D 

E 
. F 
































' 

8 

.22 

1.76 

Gatekeeper. 












The first laborer is classified according to the importance of the position. 

Table 60. —Steam plant: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Horsepower of 
engines. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To- 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 

B 

C 

D 

E 

' F 

G 

H 

I 

J 

0 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1,000 

1,200 

1,400 

1,600 

1,800 

200 

400 

600 

800 

1,000 

1,200 

1,400 

1,600 

1,800 

2,000 




8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

1 

8 

8 

$0.26 
.27 
.28 
.29 
.30 
.31 
.32 
.33 
.34 
.35 
.22 
.23 
.24 
.25 
.26 
.27 
.28 
.30 
.28 
.25 
.25 
.22 
.22 
.22 

$2.08 
2.16 
2.24 
2. 32 
2.40 
2.48 
2.56 
2. 64 
2.72 
2. 80 
1.76 
1.84 
1.92 
2.00 
2.08 
2.16 
2.24 
2. 40 
2. 24 
2.00 
2.00 
1.76 
1.76 
1.76 













jkELgmeer 1 ... 

Engine oiler. 



















Dynamo man 2 . 

A 

B 

C 

D 

E 
. F 

0 

400 

800 

1,200 

1,600 

2,000 

400 

800 

1.200 

1,600 

2,000 

2,400 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

$0.20 

.21 

.22 

.23 

.24 

.25 

$1.80 
1.89 
1.98 
2.07 
2.16 
2.25 

Head fireman 8 . 

First fireman 4 . 







Coal fireman. 




8 

8 

8 

8 

8 

9 

.25 

.25 

.22 

.22 

.22 

.25 

2.00 
2.00 
1.76 
1.76 
1.76 
2. 25 

Wood fireman. 




Coal handler. 




Wood handler. 




Ash handler. 




Boiler cleaner. 












1 Classed by indicated horsepower of engines. 

8 Classed by capacity in kilowatts of dynamos. 
8 In charge of 10 boilers or more. 

<In charge of less than 10 boilers. 











































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


99 


Table 61.— Repairs: 1910. 


Occupations. 


Head machinist. 


Machinist. 


Machine helper. 


Head millwright. 


Millwright. 


Millwright helper. 


Carpenter. 


Head piper. 


Piper. 


Patternmaker. 



Class. 

Tonnage. 

Daywork. 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 


A 


9 

$0.35 

$3.15 


B 


9 

.36 

3.24 


C 


9 

.37 

3.33 


D 


9 

.38 

3.42 


E 

Minimum to 

9 

.39 

3.51 


F 

maximum. 

9 

.40 

3.60 


G 


9 

.41 

3.69 


II 


9 

.42 

3.78 


I 


9 

.43 

3.87 


J 


9 

.44 

3.96 


A 


9 

.25 

2.25 


B 


9 

.26 

2.34 


C 


9 

.27 

2.43 


D 


9 

.28 

2.52 


E 


9 

.29 

2.61 


F 

>.... CIO. 

9 

.30 

2. 70 


G 


9 

.31 

2. 79 


II 


9 

.32 

2.88 


I 


9 

.33 

2.97 


J 


9 

.34 

3.06 


A 


9 

.20 

1.80 


B 


9 

.21 

1.89 


C 

>.. _.do. 

9 

.22 

1.98 

* 

D 


9 

.23 

2.07 


E 


9 

.24 

2.16 


A 


9 

.33 

2.97 


B 


9 

.34 

3.06 


C 


9 

.35 

3.15 


D 


9 

.36 

3.24 


E 

*■•••• CIO........ 

9 

.37 

3.33 

J 

F 


9 

.38 

3.42 


G 


9 

.39 

3.51 


H 


9 

.40 

3.60 


A 


9 

.25 

2.25 


B 


9 

.26 

2.34 


C 


9 

.27 

2. 43 


D 

_do. 

9 

.28 

2.52 


E 


9 

.29 

2.61 


F 


9 

.30 

2.70 


G 


9 

.31 

2.79 


H 


9 

.32 

2.88 


A 


9 

.20 

1.80 


B 


9 

.21 

1.89 


C 

_do. 

9 

.22 

1.98 


D 


9 

.23 

2.07 


E 


9 

.24 

2.16 


A 

' 

9 

.24 

2.16 


B 


9 

.25 

2.25 


C 


9 

.26 

2.34 


D 

_do. 

9 

.27 

2.43 


E 


9 

.28 

2.52 


F 


9 

.29 

2.61 


G 


9 

.30 

2.70 


A 


9 

.32 

2.88 


B 


9 

.33 

2.97 


C 


9 

.34 

3.06 


D 

.... do........ 

9 

.35 

3.15 


E 


9 

.36 

3.24 


F 


9 

.37 

3.33 


G 


9 

.38 

3.42 


A 


9 

.24 

2.16 


B 


9 

.25 

2.25 


C 


9 

.26 

2.34 


D 

>... .do. 

9 

.27 

2. 43 


E 


9 

.28 

2.52 


F 


9 

.29 

2.61 


G 


9 

.30 

2.70 


A 


9 

.26 

2.34 


B 


9 

.27 

2.43 


c 

■_do. 

9 

.28 

2.52 


D 


9 

.29 

2. 61 


E 

1 

9 

CO 

o 

2. 70 


Tour work. 


Hours 

per 

tour. 


Rate 

per 

hour. 


Daily 

wages. 








































































































































100 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 61. — Repairs: 1910 — Continued. 


Occupations. 


Blacksmith. 

Blacksmith helper 

Mason. 

Mason helper. 

Painter.. 

Painter helper..., 
Roll grinder. 

Knife grinder.... 

Saw filer. 

Draftsman. 

Electrician. 


Lead burner. 

Lead burner helper, 
Laborer. 




Daywork. 

Tour work 

• 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

1 

Hours j 
per 
day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

A 


9 i 

SO. 26 
.27 

$2.34 




B 


9 

2.43 




c 


9 1 

.28 

2.52 




D 

Minimum to 
maximum. ‘ 

9 j 

.29 

2.61 




E 

9 

.30 

2.70 




F 

9 ! 

.31 

2.79 




G 


9 ! 

.32 

2.S8 




H 


9 I 

.33 

2.97 




I 


9 

.34 

3.06 




A 


9 

.20 

1.80 




B 


9 

.21 

1.89 




c 

.do. 

9 

.22 

1.98 




D 


9 

.23 

2.07 




E 


9 

.24 

2.16 




A 


9 | 

.28 

2. 52 




B 


9 

.29 

2. 61 




C 


9 

.30 

2. 70 




D 


9 

.31 

2.79 




E 

1_do. 

9 

.32 

2.88 

• 



F 


9 

.33 

2.97 




G i 


9 

.34 

3.06 




H 


9 

.35 

3.15 




I 


9 

.30 

3.24 






9 

.20 

1.80 




a r 


9 

.22 

1.98 




B 


9 

.23 

2. 07 




C 

Minimum to 
maximum. 

9 

.24 

2.16 




D 

9 

.25 

2.25 




E 

9 

.26 

2.34 




F 


9 

.27 

2.43 




G 


9 

.28 

2.52 






9 

.20 

1.80 




A -I 


9 

.26 

2.34 




B 


9 

.27 

2. 43 




C 

Minimum to 
maximum. 

9 

.28 

2.52 




- D 

9 

.29 

2.61 




E 

9 

.30 

2.70 




F 


9 

.31 

2. 79 




G .| 


9 

.32 

2. 88 




A 


9 

.20 

1.80 




-K B 

_do. 

9 

.21 

1.89 




G 


9 

.22 

1.98 




A 


9 

.20 

1.80 




B 


9 

.21 

1.89 




• c 

_do. 

9 

.22 

1.98 




D 


9 

.23 

2.07 




E 


9 

.24 

2.16 




A 

' 

9 

.28 

2.52 




B 


9 

.29 

2.61 




C 


9 

.30 

2.70 




- D 

_do . 

9 

.31 

2.79 




E 


9 

.32 

2.88 




F 


9 

.33 

2. 97 




. G 


9 

.34 

3.06 




A 


9 

.24 

2.16 




B 


9 

.25 

2.25 




C 


9 

.26 

2.34 




D 


9 

.27 

2. 43 




- E 

_ do . 

9 

.28 

2.52 




F 


9 

.29 

2.61 




G 


9 

.30 

2.70 




H 


9 

.31 

2.79 




I 


9 

.32 

2.88 




A 


f 9 

.26 

2. 34 




B 


9 

.27 

2. 43 




C 


9 

.28 

2.52 




• D 

>_ do . 

9 

.29 

2. 61 




E 


9 

.30 

2.70 




F 


9 

.31 

2.79 




G 


9 

.32 

2.88 





■ 


.20 

1.80 




.. \ B 

_do. 

\ 9 

.21 

1.89 




1 c 


1 9 

.22 

1.98 






9 

.19 

1.71 











Head men are classified according to the number of repair men in their crew and all others in the repair 
section according to their efficiency. 





















































































































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER, 

Table 62. — Railroad operation: 1910. 


101 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Engineer. 




9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

9 

$0.28 

.21 

.21 

.23 

.19 

.13 

.24 

$2.52 

1.89 

1.89 

2.07 

1.71 

1.17 

2.16 




Fireman. 




Trainman. 







First trackman. 







Trackman. 







Gate tender. 







Car repairer. 















Ta 


een plates: 1910. 


Occupations. 


Head plate cutter 


Plate cutter 


Class. 

Tonnage. 

Day work. 

Tour work. 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

A 


9 

$(). 25 

$2.25 




B 


9 

.26 

2. 34 




C 


9 

.27 

. 2.43 




D 

Minimum to 

9 

.28 

2. 52 




‘ E 

maximum. 

9 

.29 

2. 01 




F 


9 

.30 

2. 70 




G 


9 

.31 

2. 79 




H 


9 

.32 

2.88 




A 1 


9 

.20 

1.80 




B 


9 

.21 

1.89 




C 

_do. 

9 

.22 

1.98 




D 


9 

.23 

2.07 




E 

1 


9 

.24 

2.16 





Table 64. —Core machines: 1910. 


Occupations. 

Class. 

Tonnage. 

Daywork. 

Tour work. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

. 

Daily 

wages. 

First core maker. 




9 

9 

$0.20 
.19 

$1.80 

1.71 




Core maker. 















Table 65. —Cotton waste: 1910. 




Tonnage. 

Daywork. 

Tour work. 

Occupations. 

Class. 

From— 

To— 

Hours 

per 

day. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

Hours 

per 

tour. 

Rate 

per 

hour. 

Daily 

wages. 

TToarl r>r>ttnn-wa.ste man_ 




9 

$0.25 

$2.25 




Ontterman... 




9 

.19 

1.71 




Rmlarman 




9 

.19 

1.71 




W ash firm an .. 





8 

$0.23 

$1.84 



































































































































































102 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


(b). RATES OF WAGES AND HOURS OF EMPLOYMENT. 

SCOPE OF INVESTIGATION. 

Information relative to wages and hours of labor in the wood- 
pulp and news-print paper industry has been secured from 50 com¬ 
panies or firms operating 165 mills in the United States and 
Canada. Of the 38 companies located in the United States, 27 are 
in the Eastern States, 10 are in the Lake States, and 1 company 
has a plant or plants in both geographical divisions. 

In the following table the ground-wood, sulphite, and news-print 
paper mills for which information has been secured are shown by 
localities: 

Table 66. —Mills for which information was secured, by product and geographical 

division. 


Mills. 

Eastern 

States. 

Lake 

States. 

Canada. 

United 

States 

and 

Canada. 

Ground wood pulp. 

54 

13 

13 

80 

Sulphite fiber. 

25 

6 

5 

36 

News-print paper. 

33 

9 

7 

49 

Total. 

112 

28 

25 

165 


It will be noted that the number of mills for which data as to 
wages and hours of labor have been secured is slightly larger than 
the number included in the tables showing cost of production. A 
number of mills producing ground wood pulp and sulphite fiber to 
be used for purposes other than the manufacture of news-print 
paper, and a number of paper mills producing news-print paper 
only as a secondary product, have been omitted from the cost tables. 
This has been done because the cost of production in these mills 
differs somewhat from the cost of production in mills manufacturing 
only news-print paper, or pulp or fiber to be made into news-print 
paper. There is, however, no corresponding difference in conditions 
affecting labor, and for this reason data as to wages and hours of labor 
are presented for all the ground wood, sulphite, and news-print 
paper mills for which information had been secured. 

CLASSIFICATION AND PRESENTATION OF DATA. 

For the purpose of presenting the data the employees are classified 
by selected occupations and by groups of occupations. In collecting 
wage statistics the practice was followed of using one schedule for an 
entire plant. A large proportion of the plants visited manufacture 
more than one product, and for this reason it is impossible, in many 
instances, to distinguish between employees working upon one product 
and those working upon another. Certain occupations are found only 
in a single branch of the industry. Grindermen, for example, are em¬ 
ployed only in the ground-wood mills, chippers, digester cooks and 
acid makers only in the sulphite mills, and machine tenders, back 



















PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


103 


tenders, and the other members of the machine crew only in the news¬ 
print paper mills. On the other hand, certain occupations are com¬ 
mon to two or more branches of the industry. Where men in these 
occupations are reported in a mill manufacturing two or more prod¬ 
ucts, it is impossible to determine whether they are employed in the 
manufacture of one product or of another. Among the employees 
in occupations which can not be classified exactly by product may 
be mentioned barkermen, screenmen, and wet-machine tenders in 
mills manufacturing both ground wood pulp and sulphite fiber, and 
engineers, firemen, and laborers in mills manufacturing both pulp 
and paper. 

In view of these facts, it is impossible, in presenting statistics rela¬ 
tive to wages and hours of labor, to classify employees according to 
the branch of the industry in which they are employed. It is known, 
however, that the wages in a given occupation are not materially 
affected by the character of the product. In the case of two barker- 
men working in a given plant, one in the ground-wood mill, and the 
other in the sulphite mill, there will in most instances be little differ¬ 
ence in the hourly wages paid. The same is true of screenmen, and 
pressmen in plants making ground-wood pulp and sulphite fiber and 
of engineers, firemen, and laborers in plants making both pulp and 
news-print paper. The plan has therefore been adopted of classifying 
the different pulp and paper occupations in groups according to the 
branch or branches of the industry in which they are found. The 
groups are five in number and are as follows: (1) Occupations in 
ground-wood mills; (2) occupations in sulphite mills; (3) occupations 
common to ground-wood and sulphite mills; (4) occupations in news¬ 
print paper mills; (5) occupations common to pulp and paper mills. 

While every occupation in the pulp and paper industry might be 
included in one or another of the above groups, the data have been 
tabulated only for the principal occupations in each group. In the 
mills for which schedules have been secured there are over a hundred 
different occupations. The number of employees in many of these 
occupations is, however, small, and there is found to be considerable 
variation in occupations between the different mills, even in cases 
where the same product is manufactured. This variation may be due 
in part to the fact that an occupation known by a certain name in 
one mill may be known by a different name in another mill. The 
occupations'for which data have been tabulated have been selected 
as representative and characteristic occupations of the industry. A 
large proportion of the employees for whom information! was secured 
in all of the three localities included in the investigation are in these 
occupations. The different occupations selected are shown in con¬ 
nection with the detailed statistics for each group of occupations. 

The data relative to labor conditions will be presented in six gen¬ 
eral divisions. In the first of these divisions will be included data 
as to wages, hours of labor, and nativity of employees for the indus¬ 
try as a°whole. Tabulations relative to sex are not presented for 
the reason that males are almost exclusively employed in the branches 
of the industry studied. Each of the following five divisions will 
contain the data for a single group of occupations. 

All of the information^ secured has been classified < according to 
locality., An effort has been made to present the data in such a way 


104 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


as to facilitate a comparison of conditions in the Eastern States and 
Lake States with conditions in Canada. With this end in view, all 
the wage data secured have been reduced to an hourly basis. 

INDUSTRY AS A WHOLE. 

Among employees in the wood-pulp and news-print paper industry 
the proportion of females is less than 2 per cent. 

There were in the mills for which schedules have been secured 
17,416 male employees. Of these employees, 12,054 were in mills 
in the Eastern States, 2,344 in mills in the Lake States, and 3,018 
in Canadian mills. Male employees are classified, in the following 
table, by geographical division and general occupation. 

Table 67 .—Male employees for whom, information was secured by general occupation and 

geographical division. 


General occupation. 

Eastern 

States. 

Lake 

States. 

Canada. 

United 

States 

and 

Canada. 

Occupations: 

In ground-wood mills. 

648 

117 

264 

1.029 

In sulphite mills. 

310 

45 

61 

416 

Common to ground-wood and sulphite mills. 

939 

187 

511 

1,637 

In news-print paper mills. 

2,078 

2,308 

300 

320 

2,698 

3,393 

Common to pulp and paper mills. 

684 

401 


Total. 

6,283 

5,771 

1.333 

1,557 

9,173 

All other occupations. 

1,011 

lj 461 

8,243 




Grand total. 

12,054 

2,344 

3,018 

17,416 




In the course of its investigation the Tariff Board has secured 
original data relative to the nativity of 7,745 employees, of whom 
6,811 are in mills in the Eastern States, and 934 in mills in the Lake 
States. The figures are presented in the following table: 

Table 68. —•Nativity of employees. 


Country of birth. 

Eastern 

States. 

Lake 

States. 

Total. 

United States. 

3,923 

1,156 

485 

4,408 

1,203 

402 

Canada. 

47 

Russia. 

'341 

61 

Italy. 

320 

6 

326 

Ireland. 

274 

2 

276 

Austria. 

160 

111 

271 

Poland. 

197 

12 

209 

Germany. 

53 

102 

155 

England. 

93 

3 

96 

Holland. 

49 

49 

Sweden. 

28 

21 

49 

Prince Edward Island.... 

48 

48 

Nova Scotia. 

37 


37 

Hungary. 

35 

1 

36 

Syria../.. 

30 


30 

Scotland. 

25 

2 

27 

France. 

25 

1 

26 

Norway. 

7 

13 

20 

Denmark. 

15 

3 

18 




Country of birth. 

Eastern 

States. 

Lake 

States. 

Total. 

Greece. 

12 


12 

Finland. 

11 


11 

Turkey. 

10 


10 

Belgium. 


6 

6 

Switzerland. 

2 

2 

4 

Bohemia.. 


3 

3 

Luxemburg. 


3 

3 

Wales... 

2 


2 

Austria-Hungary. 

1 


1 

Bavaria. T.... 


1 

1 

Brazil. 

1 


1 

Cuba. 

1 


1 

Newfoundland. 

1 


1 

Prussia. 

1 


1 

Sicilv. 

1 


1 

South America. 

1 


1 

Total. 

0,811 

934 

7,745 






























































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


105 


Of the 7,745 employees for whom data are presented in the table, 
4,408, or about 57 per cent, are of native birth. It will be noted that 
oyer one-third of the foreign-born employees are of Canadian na¬ 
tivity. The number of employees from the countries of southern 
and eastern Europe slightly exceeds the number of Canadians. 

Data secured in 1909 by the United States Immigration Commis¬ 
sion, which have been placed at the disposal of the Tariff Board, show 
a smaller proportion of foreign-born employees than has been indi¬ 
cated above. The proportion of Canadian employees among the 
foreign-born was found to be about the same by the Immigration 
Commission as by the Tariff Board, but the returns of the Immigra¬ 
tion Commission disclose a somewhat larger proportion of southern 
and eastern Europeans than do the data secured by the Tariff Board. 
This difference is probably due to the more limited scope of the former 
investigation. 

Employees in paper and pulp mills in the localities included in the 
investigation may conveniently be divided into two general groups— 
shift workers and day workers. Among the shift workers are included 
those operatives employed on or about the machinery of the paper 
mill which, in order to secure the greatest possible economy of pro¬ 
duction, must be kept in continuous operation. The members of the 
machine crew, the grindermen, the barkermen, the beatermen, the 
engineers, the oilers, and the firemen, and men in occupations of a 
similar nature work in most mills by the shift. 

The day workers are those employees engaged in work which does 
not have to be carried on continuously. In general, employees in this 
group do their work, as the designation indicates, in the daytime. 
The group embraces in most instances the workers in the finishing 
department and employees engaged in keeping the plant in a state 
of repair, as blacksmiths, masons, carpenters, machinists, millwrights, 
general laborers, etc. 

There is considerable variation in hours of labor in the different 
localities and in the different mills. The shift men work either three 
shifts per day or two shifts per day. In the case of the three-shift 
men the shifts are 8 hours in length, while most of the two-shift men 
work 11 hours on the day shift and 13 hours on the night shift. It 
is understood that in all mills the shifts are changed at regular inter¬ 
vals, so that two-shift employees working at night 13 hours one week 
work 11 hours by the day the following week, and three-shift employ¬ 
ees report for work at a different hour for three successive weeks. 
For day employees the working day usually consists of either 9 or 10 
hours. 

In general the day employees work 10 hours in mills in which the 
shift employees are divided into two shifts and 9 hours where the 
three-shift system is in force. There are, however, mills in which the 
shift employees work 8 hours and the day employees 10 hours, and a 
very few mills in which some employees work two shifts, some three 
shifts, some by the day 9 hours and some by the day 10 hours. 

In the following table the employees for whom information was 
secured are classified by geographical divisions and by hours worked 
per day or per shift: 



106 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 69. —Hours worked per day or per shift in selected groups of occupations. 
[The percentages have been computed only in cases where data are presented for 50 or more employees.] 


Geographical divisions and occupations. 

Male em¬ 
ployees 
for 

whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Per cent of employees working — 

Three 

shifts 

per 

day. 

Two 

shifts 

per 

day. 

By the 
day 9 
hours. 

By the 
day 10 
hours. 

Other¬ 
wise 
than as 
speci¬ 
fied. 

Eastern States: 

Occupations— 

Tn grnnnd-wnnd mills_ 

648 

310 

939 

2,078 

2,308 

80.9 

72.6 

67.8 
82.2 

28.8 

15.7 

14.8 
11.2 

5.8 

6.9 

3.4 

9.0 

17.8 

9.7 

40.6 



In sulphite mills. 

Common to ground-wood and sulphite mills. 

In news-print paper mills. 

Common to pulp and paper mills. 

Total. 

3.2 

2.1 

2.1 

23.0 

0.3 

1.1 

.1 

.7 

6,283 

59.8 

8.5 

21.6 

9.6 

.5 

Lake States: 

Occupations— 

In ground-wood mills. 

117 

45 

187 

300 

684 


96.6 

0) 

55.6 

93.7 

13.7 


2.6 

(O 

44.4 

6.0 

83.8 

.9 

In sulphite mills. 



Common to ground-wood and sulphite mills. 

In news-print paper mills. 

Common to pulp and paper mills. 

Total . 

2.3 


.3 

.1 

1,333 

1.2 

47.3 


51.3 

.2 

Canada: 

Occupations— 

In ground-wood mills . 

In sulphite mills . 


264 

61 

511 

320 

401 

38.6 

53.0 

82.0 

64.2 

42.8 

39.9 


4.2 

14.8 

17.6 

10.3 

48.1 

4.2 

3.3 

7.4 

.2 

Common to ground-wood and sulphite mills. 

In news-print paper mills. 

Common to pulp and paper mills. 

Total. 

10.8 

46.9 

11.7 


1,557 

22.7 

52.3 


21.6 

3.3 

Total in Eastern States. 

Total in Lake States. 


6,283 

1,333 

1,557 

59.8 

1.2 

22.7 

8.5 

47.3 

52.3 

21.6 

9.6 

51.3 

21.6 

.5 

.2 

3.3 

Total in Canada. 


Grand total. 


9,173 

45.0 

21.6 

14.8 

17.7 

.9 


Not computed because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 









































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


107 


Of the 9,173 employees in the United States and Canada for whom 
data are presented in the above table, 45 per cent work three shifts 
per day, 21.6 per cent two shifts per day, 14.8 per cent by the day 
9 hours, 17.7 per cent by the day 10 hours, and less than 1 per cent 
other hours than specified. It will be noted that the shift employees 
greatly outnumber the day employees, and that the proportion of 
three-shift employees is more than twice as large as the proportion 
of two-shift employees. The above statements are not, however, 
true of all the localities for which data are presented. In the Lake 
States the day employees slightly outnumber the shift employees, 
and both in the Lake States and in Canada a much larger proportion 
of the shift employees work two shifts than work three shifts. On the 
other hand, almost 60 per cent of all the employees in the Eastern 
States for whom data are presented work three shifts per day as com¬ 
pared with 8.5 per cent working two shifts per day. None of the 
employees in the mills in the Lake States and Canada work by the 
day 9 hours, while in eastern mills the number of employees working 
by the day 9 hours is more than twice as large as the number work¬ 
ing by the day 10 hours. 

From the standpoint of the length of the working day, considered 
with out reference to compensation, employees in eastern mills appear 
to occupy a more favorable position than employees in Canadian 
mill s, and the latter a more favorable position than employees in the 
mills in the Lake States. 

In the following table the employees for whom data were secured 
are classified by general occupation, hours worked per day or per 
shift, and rates of pay per hour. The tabulation is by wage groups. 


Table 70. —Rate of pay and hours worked per day or per shift in selected groups of occupations — United States and Canada. 


108 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


-HI 


o 

C3 


o 

<0> 


Q . 

i 10 yi 


d « 3 ‘ 

*C 

HJ 1 


£ g.§ 


o 


COCO 


05 


CO 

Tf 


CO 

TT 


*d 

a 


*c . 

d w 

0^1 I 

Tr ^3 o 


C3 


05 


-J< 

o 


-O' 

o 


'O 2 • 
§ 


05 


05 


00 CO 

CO rH 


CO 


•d 10 . 

a w ®2 

d w fl d 
d g 

CO -4^ w 


O CM 
CM 


CO o 
CO CM 


CO 

*C 


r o ST • 

0 OTCC “ 

0 g 0 0 

O 5 <D 
CO rd o 
+3 


CO CO 
CM 


co 

CM 


O 05 
CM t-H 


05 

CO 


■d o . 

Sb”| 
& 5° 


cc • CO 

Cl 


05 

CM 


Tt« i 
00 rH 


3 

o 

rd 

U 

C5 

ft 

• M 
0 
ft 

CO 

<15 

© 

>> 

o 

ft 

B 

H 


. Hn 
p CO CM ^ 
pgdd 
io' h ^ © 
CM dl O 


CM 


O CM rH 
CM rH 


CO 

CO 




CM CO lO 1 
lO CO 


T3 J 5 . 
0 

CM rd g 

CM 4-3 W 


CO CM 

»o 

CO 


t^CM 
I s - rH 


v-H 


L- 

CM 

•^r 


HCi NH 


00 

CO 


r-r. i 

5^ W 


'd 

d w c 

d g d d 

d 05 

^ 5° 


C5 CM CO CM 
CO 


05 rH 00 CO 
CM CM rH 


CM ^ 00 
CO CO rH 


05 C5 CO CO 
•"cr CM t?' h 


CO 

CO 


o . 

CM co 


'd 

d CO _ ^5 
d W d rt 

t- rd S 


O CO 05 i 
00 CO rH 


CO 00 T 


CO 00 rH C5 
O CM 00 


CO 


*0 CO T-H H 
05 CM CO ^ 


*C 

05 

CM 


'd 

d 


r<tt 

* 

WHW 

<s 8 a d 

*0^ 2 J5 

rH rd O 

-4-3 


00 


CO 

CO 


CM 


*0 00 CM rH 
CM CM r- 
Cl 


t— ^ cm r— 

t'- CO 


o 

CM 

CM 


'd ** . 

a <2 

d ^ d rt 

5*^2 a § 

<N ,0 © 

_ I ^ 


CO 

CM 


o 

CO 


iO 

lo 

CM 


IQ 


o 

00 


w 


cm 

fl C0H 

d g d d 

r—i r^ d 05 

s ,0 « 


00 


00 


iO 

co 


IO 


CM 


05 


'do^ 
2^ § 
P © 


00 


00 


ic 


*c 


^ ® ° 0 I'S 

® ©0 S ^ 2 


C3 *■—• 


>-• ^ r-j 

O 0 0 
____ «h o 05 

h fl-- ® 
S ^ O -d W 


'd 

05 

Vh 

o 

w 

0if 

^ CO 

"d 


05 

P4 

V-< 

O 


'■§& 
ftTJ 
d i-» 
O 05 


C 

O 

d 

05 

d 

05 

O 


ft 


CO 1C CM Tf< 
CM »0 CM rH 
CO CO 


lO^OOcO 
CM CO CM CM 
CM rH 


cm co 

C5 CO CO 05 

CO *C rH rH 


05 05 CM 1C 

>OCOOC5 

00 ic CM 


IC 

05 

CO 

cm" 


• • • t 

• ; ; . j 

• « • 

; ; ' w 

i 

: 2 

; ; I w ; 

• • 

• • 

• • 

' ’ h d ' 

C/5 t-H 

; ; 2 s 

« co 


• • 

:. • g 2 • 

: : 0 o 

; "d 

. . 0 O 

• • 


d d^S 

tj'dOH 

' ® ® 0 0 
5 ftft' 0 'O 
.0 ” +2 ® ® 
003 

.J ^ 03 x! ^ ** 
ftTJ M w >i t>> 
0 OCON0P 
g 8 bcbCbCbO 
offiflflfl 

0 , dS333 

05 3 o C O O 


w 
0 . 
_o: 

0 


O 


. 

*d 05 t 

*-**-*>»>> 
® ® 0 0 
ft ft^C t3 

ssss ® ® 

J IM ^ 

mtt, 

•0 CO <N ^ 03 
9 aobctcfc/j 
©0000 

.ts s A<! M M 

J0 M «H M tH 

0,0 ° ° o 

CO 


0 

T3 

O 

o 


o 

tx 


F»> E>> 3 hh 
0 0^0 
00O5H 

5S }S 

ftft-0-0 

*j03.=)r0 

22^^ 

«5 CO >»>» 


0 

+J 

o 

E-i 


</5 fc£ 03 6C 5X) 

003 0 0 0 0 -h 

*rH C3 

g 04 0^3 AC — 

0 M t. !_ (-1 

o © o o o o 


o 

Eh 


ft 


CO 0 

!3§ 


03 0^0 
c l 3 ' 0 r 0 Ca rH 
0 *h ^ 

•0 ® 0 0 0 

0 ftft'0’0 

i-^^2 © © 

g< 2 !H +J+J 
S <0 w >>>, 

0 b/0 be tU3 M 
•- 0 0 0 0 
ftS 222 

,1 h >- tl t. 

S O O O O 


0 

—3 

O 

Eh 


O 























































































































PULP AND NEWS-PEINT PAPEE 


109 


• • • ( 

• 

O i • • 

o 

• It* 

• • • • 

• • • • 

• • • • 

• • « • 

• • • • 

• III 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• 

05 • • • 

• • t 

• • • 

t • • 

• t I 

• It 

t • 1 

05 

• * I I 

• • 1 • 

• 

• • 

C5 CO • • 

<M 

• • I I 

t 

Tfi 1 1 

tD 

• • I I 

• 1 • • 

• • t • 

• • 1 • 

• III 

• 

i 

t 

• 

t 

rH • i 

• t 

t • 

• • 

• • 

rH 

1 • 1 I 

• • 1 • 

• 

• 

• t t 

CO • • • 

CO 

• III 

t 

rH t i i 

rH 

fill 

• • I 1 

■ III 

• • • I 

till 

• 

• 

• 

rH • • • 

• t i 

It! 

1 t 1 

• 1 I 

rH 

• • 1 

05 • • • 

03 

CD CO • • 

05 

• I 1 

• • • 

• 1 1 

• it 

• ( i 

• • • 


CO rH • • 

• t 

• i 

• • 

• t 

• • 

05 

I • 

03 ■ • rH 

o 

(M CO • rH 

CD 

• 1 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

rH 

CD <M • 

• 

• 

• 

00 

t • I 

H • • • 

rH 

(M ■ . 

CD 

<M • • • 

<M 

0<M • • 

GO 

• ■ • 

• •• 

!•• 

• • • 

• •• 


rH • • 

• • 

• t 

• • 

t • 

rH 

CD CO H • 

O 

ONLO • 

rH 

r-H • 

<M 

CN rH i 

to 

rH • 

• 

i 

• 

i 

• 

rH 

<M 

1 

• 

• 

• 

CM 

»o 00 03 CO 

lO 

00 CO »o ^ 

o 

05 

rH 

CO O rH 

rH 

CM 

CO 

ID 

CD 

00 CO 

TJ1 

>0l>0<0 

OC 

r- 

05 

CO <M 'VT 

o 



CD 

p- 







rH 

rH 

o —1 CO N- 

CO 

mo cd co 

00 

OC4CO 

TJH 

CO P- CD' rr 

rH 

rH r-H 

CO 

CD CO rH 

<M 




rH 

T^OHOO 

00 

H CDNN 

CD 

com COIN 

CO 

GO CO O CD 

00 

CM 

o 

CO rH 00 CO 

CD 






rH 


rH 

COt-NC 

o 

00 CD rH rH 

CD 

T— 1 CO rH rH 

00 

miONm 

CD 

iH rH 05 

rH 

NHO 

05 






rH 

rH 

rH 

•ININh 

lo 

■ CO (M CD 

rH 

• 00 x t' 

CM 

• p- to 

CO 

• rH 

• 

• 

• 

• 

<M 

• p- 

• 

• 

• 

00 

• 00 • C5 


• • 

• CD ' rH 

p- 

1 t 

• 1 

1 1 

1 • 

• • 

• I 

rH 

• CD ' rH 

• i 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• • 


• • * 

• N • • 

<M 

. iO • • 

tD 

i • • 

• it 

■ *t 

• • t 

• • t 

• • • 


• rH ■ • 

• • • 

t it 

t •• 

t t • 

i • • 

rH 

p- rt« co 


05 05 CD Tt« 

go 

OJ rH CO 05 

t'- 

<N b- CO <M 

CO 

P- TT 05 CM 

CO 

rH 05 CO CD 

o 





rH 

CO 

mHHH 

03 


\T. 




• ■ : co 

CO *- 
£ 3 
■ ■ 3 2 

* c3 O 
g ( 'P r Pa3.-< 
03 t-> «i 
p,© £ ra 03 

P22® £ 

OSSIP-g^ 

CLrd rM 

pp w m >>>> 
PcoiN,P,P 
bcbobcbe 

o p p p ~ 


M ^ ^ 

O o o o o 

S ^ ^ ^ 


c p 

-H 

o 


B 

3 

c3 O 

^ 7Z? O rH 

*1&5? 

^2^2 © © 

SS -P.P 

,32 4i * B 

'coco >>>> 

cy3<M,P,0 

be bo be be 

CflCCl 

•r* «f—< • »*■< • "H 

In h h h 

o o o o 

fcs £ £s £ 


P 

4-S 

o 

-fci 

T3 

P 

03 

t_ 

o 


o 


P p p P 
■*J -N> ■*■» +3> 

o o o o 


^EhEhBh 


be 


bO 


§> So 

Tl & - cl 
flic ^ 

J-h _j o> 

fc» O M 

■" e/& co 


bC"^ 


bJO 1-1 T„ 
p be*? 


1 * 
> p 

<L> 

1 a 

g 

p 

H 

1 s 

CD 

3 


be be be 

.3.3.3 

'O'O'P 
PS P 
©o'© 

.3.3.3 


ppp 

o o o 

£££ 

- « n 


bCbO^ 

..S.Sj? 

tj'O'O'P 

P P P n 

A g 2 P< 

*h .£4 .3 c/5 

<D 4_5 o Sh 

p, o o P 
c*'Z'Z o 
m ,c - i '' h ,p 
. ^ 
o 


CO 


* 










































































110 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


The above table seems to show a definite relation between the 
number of hours worked per day or per shift and the rate of pay per 
hour. It appears that the proportion of employees receiving the 
higher rates specified is considerably larger in the case of employees 
working three shifts per day than in the case of employees working 
two shifts per day. Of the three-shift employees a larger number 
are paid 22J and less than 25 cents per hour than are paid at any 
other specified rate, while the rate reported for the largest number of 
two-shift employees is 12£ and less than 15 cents per hour. A 
similar relation is found to exist between the wages of employees 
working by the day 9 hours, and the w^ages of employees working by 
the day 10 hours. 

It is evident from the data presented that the earnings in a day or 
week of employees working three shifts per day, or by the day 9 
hours, will often equal or exceed the earnings of employees working 
two shifts per day or by the day 10 hours. In other words, the 
shortest hours do not necessarily indicate the smallest earnings. 

In the following table the data have been rearranged for the pur¬ 
pose of showing the relation between wages in the United States and 
wages in Canada. The hours of labor have been disregarded. 


Table 71. —Rate of pay in selected groups of occupations. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


111 


Per cent of employees paid per hour— 

50 cents 

and 

over. 

1 

* • i 

• • • 

* • • 

• • i 


« t • 

i • i 

• i i 

• • • 


• » • 

• # • 

i • • 

• • • 

• • • 

• • • 

lit 

• < i 

• 

• 

i 

Tfl . CO 
co ’ cd 

3.3 

i i • 

iii 

i i i 

• i • 

• t • 

• •• 

• ii 

i 

• 

• 

rH • CO 

rH i rH 

1.0 

45 and 
less 

than 50 
cents. 

• • • 

• • • 

• • i 

• • • 

• •• 

• • i 

• • i 

■ i i 


03 • 03 

rH • 

2.2 

• • • 

» • • 

• • i 

• i i 

• it 

• ii 

• ii 


TJ 1 ! Tji 

cd • cd 

5.3 | 

• • • 

• ii 

• 

• 

• 

CM • 03 

cd • 

• 

1 

• 

1.7 

40 and 
less 

than 45 
cents. 

• • • 

• • • 

• • i 


2.9 

2.2 

• •• 

• •• 


5.1 

3.9 

• •• 

• • i 

iii 

• 

• 

• 

» 

• 

1.8 

1.2 

35 and 
less 

than 40 
cents. 

• t • 


o • • 
cd i 

2.2 

• • i 

i • i 

• ii 


(MOW 

cd oi 

3.0 

Tfl i i 

i i 

• • 

• • 

• • 

co 

CO lO CO 

rH 

1.1 

32^ and 
less 

than 35 
cents. 

• i • 

• • i 

• • • 

• i i 


rH • • 

N • « 

5.3 

• • 

. »o • 

• • 

• • 

• • 

• ( 

1 • 

rH 

lOOCO 
rH cd cd 

* 

2.0 

• • 
TP • • 

i • 

• i 

• t 

CO 

O 00 00 

rH 

03 

30 and 
less 

than 32.V 
cents.' 

• • • 

• • • 

• •• 

• i i 

• • • 

• • i 


Tf< ‘ 03 
N- • ^ 

CO 

CO 

III 

• I I 

III 


03 o 03 
Tti to cd 

5.2 

03 • • 

CO 

CO rH CO 
cd H H 

2.0 

27£ and 
less 

than 30 
cents. 

• « • 

• » • 

• • • 

• 

• 

i 

• 

i 

• 

9.4 

7.0 

III 

• 1 1 

• 1 I 

III 

III 

III 

• 1 I 

• 

• 

• 

N- N- ! 
^ rH ! 

00 

cd 

0 ‘I 

Z'9 

cd 

03 ^ CO 

cd 

2.8 

25 and 
less 

than 27 1 
cents. 

• • rH 

• • 03 

• • 

i • 

: ! 

2.3 

^ CO co 

NCOCO 

rH 

7.9 

iv 1 co 

I 

• 

• 

• 

2.9 

03 CO IV 

cd id 03 

7.1 

12.6 

.3 

5.5 

co 

03 

o oo ^ 

00 rH id 

6.6 

22 i and 
less 

than 25 
cents. 

^ ■ CO 

—h ! oo 
. 

34.5 

Tf< IV O 

00 O CO 
CM 

00 

c4 

Ol 

45.5 

26.1 

03 o <N 

^ 

co 

27.4 

03 CO O 

cd * cd 

2.8 

rH O N 

CO rH CO 
CM 

18.6 

20 and 
less 

than 22 J 
cents.* 

oo n- o 

COHN 

CM 

17.1 

N- ^ 

N^ tj3 00 

rH Ol 

17.1 

CO co N 

oo 03 oi 

00 

rH 

Tfl IV 

d Nd 

rH 

12.5 

IV 00 Ol 

03 cd rH 
rH 

10.1 

03 IV 00 

id cd cd 

rH rH 

13.4 

17^ and 
less 

than 20 
cents. 

CO 00 ^ 

o ^ ^ 

H Cl H 

13.0 

00 co CO 

iO U 0 co 
co 

8.7 

rH CO ‘O 

03 iO CO 

co 

11.2 

9.5 

9.7 

21.9 

11.0 

id oo iv 
CO <N 

30.6 

CO rH o 

00 id rH 
rH CM rH 

18.4 

15 and 
less 

than 17J 

cents. 

CO>OCi 

05 W CO 
CO (M 

19.0 

CO 03 

Hji co io 

rH ^ 

11.3 

7.5 

17.1 

50.9 

22.1 

lO O 03 

cd id o 

rH 

8.2 

CO O co 
cd GO 

(MIO^ 

34.8 

rH rH CO 

cd id i^ 
rH ^ CO 

21.9 

12 £ and 
less 

than 15 
cents. 

(MON 

id CM CO 
rH CO 

13.3 

00 IV 

co 03 
rH 

7.2 

00 ^ 03 

Tfi Nl O 
CO CO 

16.6 

00 CO oo 

cd cd c4 

rH (M 

6.7 

CM CO (M 

id rH N» 

CM 

7.0 

CO O CO 

drHOO 
rH CM 

9.4 

10 and 
less 

than 12 £ 
cents. 

i ! o 

• • CO 

: : 

00 

• • • 

• • i 

i i • 

• • • 


• • 03 

• . CO 

1 1 

rH 

! IV Iv 
! “ tji 

i 

• 

• 

CO 

MHO 

* cd 

1.0 

rH CM lO 

’'d 

00 

Under 

10 

cents. 

« • • 

• • • 

• •I 

• i • 

• • i 

• • • 

• • i 


• i i 

• ii 

t ♦ • 

i • • 

iii 

• 

• 

• 

• 

• I 

1 . CO 

i • rH 

• • 

• i 

• • 

• • 


! ! 

• rH • 

• • 

• • 

i i 

• • 


• • 

« • &o 

rH 

! CO 

CM 

Male em¬ 
ployees 
for 

whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

00 N ^ 

^ HCD 

CO H Cl 

1,029 

OOH 

H^CO 

CO 

416 

03 N» rH 

CO 00 H 
03 rH iO 

1,637 

00 o o 

NO(M 

o co co 
cd' 

869 ‘Z 

2,308 
684 
401 

3,393 

6,283 

1,333 

1,557 

9,173 


43 

O. 

C3 

bi 

i 

U) 

'S . 
9 a 

C3 o 

• H 

.23 
> 


§ 


c3 

ft 

D 

o 

o 

o 

"c3 

E 

a> 

a 

ai 

O 


CO 
0 ) 

* §s 


OCC 

& £3 

x) a> 
n +* 


cs 

-t^> 

m 
a> g 


co 

CJ 


as 


cS 

ft a 

C3 i—« 
O 

o 

O 


3“^C 
rz cz 03 c3 

be 


«S 

o 


>1 P 


T3 

C 

03 

T3 

O 

O 

£ 

73 

a 

a 

o 

S3> 


CO 
O’ 

+J 

n$ 


a> 


c3 
"d 
« c8 


fH ^ C3 

*5 C/3 d 
P* c3 o3 pj 

3WJO 


c3 

h> 

O 


Vi 


l=| 9-3 £ 
o a, 22^ a 

o* 

o 


03 

-M 

o 


n . 

o 50 
Pi CD 
c3 * 

piS 8 

a M ^' 

o> rt 
^ c3 c3 c3 

a 


03 

-u 

O 

H 


9 

H 

0 > 

Ph 

c3 

P< 


§ co 
<u 
ft+J 

§3 8 

ft^-9 

a"su 
o a 

H 03 C3 C3 

Sw^o 


c3 


c3 

4-3 

o 

Eh 


Vi 

0 / 


38 

G rn 
«h ®2 

3 

co4*i 
oJ 03 c3 

WHO 
a a a 

•r—< •»—I "f—< 
r—< r—H f—4 

oJ c3 c3 

-H -H> 

o o o 
HWH 


03 


'd 

a 

03 

f-c 

o 













































































































































112 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


In order to further simplify the eomparison of wages in the three 
localities the data for all employees are presented in the following 
table by cumulative percentages: 

Table 72 .—Per cent of employees paid each specified rate or oxer per hour, by geographical 

division. 


Rate per hour. 

Eastern 

States. 

Lake 

States. 

Canada. 

United 

States 

and 

Canada. 

30 cents or over. 

9. 7 

2.4 

5.2 

7. 9 

27§ cents or over. 

13.6 

2.8 

5.5 

10.7 

25 cents or over. 

21.6 

4.6 

10.9 

17.3 

22J cents or over. 

47.7 

5.1 

14.6 

35.9 

20*cents or over. 

63.6 

18.3 

18.4 

49.3 

17| cents or over. 

82.4 

43.4 

29.4 

67.7 

15 cents or over. 

95.5 

88.5 

66.7 

89.6 

12J cents or over. 

99.8 

99.5 

95.0 

99.0 

10 cents or over. 

100.0 

99.7 

99.5 

99.8 



The curves of the chart presented herewith show for each geo¬ 
graphical division the percentage of employees paid each specified 
rate or over. 

An inspection of the above table and of the chart shows that wages 
are considerably higher in the Eastern States than in the Lake States 
or in Canada. A larger percentage of the employees in the Eastern 
States than of the employees in either of the other localities for which 
data have been secured are paid each specified rate or over. 

A comparison of wages in the Lake States with wages in Canada is 
a somewhat more difficult matter. It will be noted that the per¬ 
centage of employees paid 30 cents or over, 27J cents or over, 25 
cents or over, 22J cents or over, and 20 cents or over per hour is 
higher for Canada than for the Lake States. On the other hand, a 
considerably larger proportion of the employees in the Lake States 
than of the employees in Canada are reported as receiving 17J cents 
or over, 15 cents or over, and 12^ cents or over per hour. 

The percentages of the general table show somewhat more clearly 
than do the cumulative percentages the grouping of the employees 
at specified wage rates. It will be noted that the group in which 
the largest proportion of employees is found, both for the Lake States 
and for Canada, is the group in which the wages paid are 15 cents and 
less than 17| cents. The proportion of employees in the group paid 
17J cents and less than 20 cents is, however, considerably larger for 
the Lake States than for Canada, while the proportion in the group 
paid 121 cents and less than 15 cents is considerably larger for Canada 
than for the Lake States. In other words, 70.2 per cent of all the 
employees in the Lake States receive 15 cents and less than 20 cents, 
while 65.6 per cent of all the employees in Canada receive 12J cents 
and less than 17J cents. 

It is evident, both from the tables and from the chart, that the pro¬ 
portion of employees paid at the higher rates specified is considerably 
larger in Canada than in the Lake States, and that the proportion of 
employees paid at the lower rates specified is larger in the Lake States 
than in Canada. 

An inspection of the general percentage table shows that the rela¬ 
tion between the wages in the several localities varies somewhat in the 





















PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


113 


CHART VII. 

Per cent of employees paid at each specified rate or over per hour. 



CENTS PER HOUR. 


S. Doc. 31, 62-1 


S 










































114 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


different groups of occupations. It will be noted, however, that in 
the case of every group wages per hour are higher in the Eastern 
States than in the Lake States or in Canada. 

The wages in the groups of occupations in which the proportion of 
skilled employees is large—as, for example, occupations in news-print- 
paper mills—are shown to be higher in Canada than in the Lake States, 
while the contrary is true of the wages in the groups of occupations in 
which most of the employees do work requiring little skill or training. 
This is probably due to a relative scarcity in Canada of skilled workers. 
The representatives of the Tariff Board found that in the Canadian 
mills visited most of the unskilled workers were Canadians of French 
descent. On the other hand, nearly all of the employees in the better- 
paid occupations were of the English-speaking races. Many of these 
men were of American birth or had worked in paper mills in the 
United States and had been drawn to Canada by advantageous offers 
of employment. 

OCCUPATIONS IN GROUND-WOOD MILLS. 

The two occupations selected for tabulation in the group of occupa¬ 
tions in ground-wood mills are those of block handler and grinderman. 
Data have been secured for 96 block handlers and 933 grindermen— 
a total of 1,029 employees for the group. The following table shows 
the proportion of employees in the selected occupations working three 
shifts per day, the proportion working two shifts per day, the propor¬ 
tion working by the day 9 hours, and the proportion working by the 
day 10 hours. 

Table 73. —Hours worked per day or per shift in selected occupations in ground-wood mills . 


[The percentages have been computed only in cases where data are presented for 50 or more employees.] 


/ 

Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Per cent of employees working— 


Geographical divisions and occupations. 

Three 
shifts 
per day. 

Two 
shifts 
per day. 

By the 
day 

9 hours. 

By the 
day 

10 hours. 

Other¬ 
wise than 
as 

specified. 

Eastern States: 

Block handler. 

63 

77.8 


22.2 



Grinderman. 

585 

81.2 

17.5 

1.4 






Total... 

648 

80.9 

15.7 

3.4 






Lake States: 

Block handler. 

i 

7 

• 

(9 

99.1 


(9 


Grinderman. 

110 



0.9 





Total. 

117 


96.6 


2.6 

.9 




Canada: 

Block handler. 

26 

(9 

41.6 

(9 

58.4 


(9 

(9 

Grinderman. 

238 






Total. 

264 

38.6 

53.0 


4.2 

4.2 



Total in Eastern States. 

648 

80.9 

15.7 

3.4 



Total in Lake States. 

117 

96.6 

2.6 

4.2 

.9 

4.2 

Total in Canada. 

264 

38.6 

53.0 




Grand total. 

1,029 

60.8 

34.5 

2.1 

1.4 

1.2 



1 Not computed because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 

































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 

\ 


115 


Of the employees in selected occupations in ground-wood mills 
for whom information was secured, 60.8 per cent work three shifts per 
day, 34.5 per cent work two shifts per day, 2.1 per cent work by the 
day 9 hours, and 1.4 per cent work by the day 10 hours. In the 
Eastern States a very large proportion of the employees work three 
shifts, a smaller proportion work two shifts, only a few work by the 
day 9 hours, and none work by the day 10 hours. None of the 
employees in the Lake States work three shifts per day or by the day 
9 hours, and none of the employees in Canada work by the day 9 
hours. The two-shift system appears to be almost universally in 
effect in the Lake States, while in Canada the proportion of employees 
working two shifts is larger than the proportion working three 
shifts. 

In the following table employees in selected occupations in ground- 
wood mills are classified by geographical division and by rates of 
pay per hour: 

Table 74 .—Rate of pay in selected occupations in ground-wood mills. 



Male 
employ¬ 
ees for 
whom 
infor¬ 
mation 
was se¬ 
cured. 


Employees paid per hour— 










Occupations and geo¬ 
graphical divisions. 

Un¬ 
der 10 
cents. 

10 

cents 
and less 
than 
12* 
cents. 

12* 
cents 
and less 
than 15 
cents. 

15 

cents 
and less 
than 
17* 
cents. 

17i 
cents 
and less 
than 20 
cents. 

20 

cents 
and less 
than 
22* 
cents. 

22* 
cents 
and less 
than 25 
cents. 

25 

cents 
and less 
than 
27* 
cents. 

27* 

cents 

and 

over. 

Block handlers: 

Eastern States.... 

63 





25 

38 




Lake States. 

7 



2 

2 

1 

2 




Canada. 

26 



11 

12 

3 













Total. 

96 



13 

14 

29 

40 










Grinderman: 

"Eastern States .. 

585 



34 

60 

42 

116 

333 



Lake, States. 

no 



12 

70 

28 



Canada. 

238 


8 

78 

51 

35 

20 

22 

24 





Total. 

933 


8 

124 

181 

105 

136 

355 

24 





Total in Eastern States 
Total in Lake States.. 
Total in Canada. . 

648 



34 

60 

67 

154 

333 



117 



14 

72 

29 

2 



264 


8 

89 

63 

38 

20 

22 

24 






nrand total 

1,029 


8 

137 

195 

134 

176 

355 

24 






The data of the above table show that wages in the occupations 
selected for tabulation are about the same in the Lake States as in 
Canada and considerably higher in the Eastern States than in either 
the Lake States or Canada. 

In the table which follows the wages of male employees in selected 
occupations in ground-wood mills are shown by maximum, mini- 
mum, and median rates. 







































































116 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


Table 75. —Rate of pay in selected occupations in ground-wood mills ( maximum, mini¬ 
mum, upper, and lower quartiles and median)} 


[The upper and lower quartiles have been entered only in cases in which information was reported for 50 

or more employees.] 



Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Rate of pay per hour. 

Occupations and geographical divisions. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Lower 

quartile. 

Median. 

Upper 

quartile. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Block handler: 

Eastern States. 

63 

$0.188 

$0.190 

SO. 210 

SO. 220 

SO. 220 

Lake States. 

7 

.125 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

.167 

( 2 ) 

.200 

Canada. 

26 

.135 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.188 



Total. 

96 

.125 

.150 

.190 

.220 

.220 




Grinderman: 

Eastern States. 

585 

.125 

.217 

.230 

.230 

.240 

Lake States. 

110 

.125 

.150 

.160 

.175 

.188 

Canada. 

238 

.117 

.135 

.167 

.210 

.255 



Total. 

933 

.117 

.160 

.220 

.230 

.255 



The terms maximum and minimum are self-explanatory. To find the median, upper quartile, and 
lower quartile, the members of a group are ranked in descending order according to the quantities under 
consideration. The median is the quantity halfway down the list thus constituted; the upper quartile is 
the quantity midway between the median and the maximum and the lower quartile is the quantity mid¬ 
way between the median and the minimum. Where the members of a given group are classified by 
wages, half receive above and half below the median, one-fourth receive above and three-fourths below 
the upper quartile. and three-fourths receive above and one-fourth below the lower quartile. 

* Not entered because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 


It will be noted from the above table that the minimum wage paid 
to block handlers is highest in the Eastern States and slightly higher 
in Canada than in the Lake States, and that the median wage and 
the maximum wage are highest in the Eastern States, second liighest 
in the Lake States, and lowest in Canada. The minimum wage for 
the occupation, \ 2 \ cents, is reported in the Lake States, and the 
maximum, 22 cents, in the Eastern States. Grindermen are some¬ 
what better paid in Canada than in the Lake States and much better 
paid in the Eastern States than in Canada. The median and upper 
quartile are highest for the Eastern States and lowest for the Lake 
States. The lower quartile is highest for the Eastern States and 
lowest for Canada, and the maximum is highest for Canada and con¬ 
siderably lower for the Lake States than for the Eastern States. The 
minimum wage, 11.7 cents, and the maximum, 25.5 cents, are paid 
in Canadian mills. 

The table shows that the wages in the selected occupations in 
ground-wood mills are, in general, higher in the Eastern States than 
in the Lake States or Canada. 
































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


117 


OCCUPATIONS IN SULPHITE MILLS. 

The data have been tabulated for five of the principal occupations 
in sulphite mills. Of the 416 employees for whom information was 
secured, 113 were chippers, 86 were digester cooks, 104 were cooks' 
helpers, 85 were acid makers, and 28 were sulphur burners. In the 
following table employees in the selected occupations are classified 
by hours worked per day or per shift. 

Table 76. —Hours worked per day or per shift in selected occupations in sulphite mills. 


[The percentages have been computed only in cases where data are presented for 50 or more employees.] 


Geographical divisions and occupations. 

Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Per cent of employees working— 

3 shifts 
per day. 

2 shifts 
per day. 

By the 
day 9 
hours. 

By the 
day 10 
hours. 

Other¬ 
wise 
than as 
specified. 

Eastern States: 

Chipper. 

77 

62 

85 

67 

19 

59.7 
74.2 
85.9 

62.7 
0) 

2.6 

25.8 
14.1 

23.9 

29.9 

7.8 


CooV(digester). 


Cook’s helper.!. 




Acid maker. 

6.0 

0) 

6.0 

1.5 

Sulphur burner. 

Total. 




310 

72.6 

14.8 

9.0 

3.2 

0.3 

Total in Eastern States. 

310 

45 

61 

72.6 

14.8 

(») 

82.0 

9.0 

3.2 

( l ) 

14.8 

0.3 

Total in Lake States. 

Total in Canada. 



3.3 

Grand total. 



416 

54.1 

32.2 

6.7 

• 

6.3 

0.7 



1 Not computed because of the small number of employees for whom information was secured. 


The above table show's that 54.1 per cent of the employees for 
whom data are presented work three shifts per day, that 32.2 per 
cent work two shifts per day, that 6.7 per cent w T ork by the day 
9 hours, and that 6.3 per cent work by the day 10 hours. In the 
Eastern States a much larger proportion of shift employees work 
three shifts per day than work two shifts per day, wdiile m Canada all 
shift employees work tw r o shifts per day. 

The following table shows the range in hourly rates of pay among 
employees in selected occupations in sulphite mills. The arrange¬ 
ment of the data is adapted to a comparison of w^ages in the different 
geographical divisions. 












































118 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER 


Table 77 .—■Rate of pay in selected occupations in sulphite mills. 



Male employees for whom 
information was secured. 

Employees paid per hour— 

Occupations and 
geographical 
divisions. 

Less than 12J cents. 

\2\ and less than 

15 cents. 

15 and less than 

17i cents. 

17£ and less than 

20 cents. 

20 and less than 

22\ cents. 

22J and less than 

25 cents. 

25 and less than 

27£ cents. 

21\ and less than 

30 cents. 

30 and less than 

32§ cents. 

32£ and less than 

35 cents. 

35 and less than 

40 cents. 

40 and less than 

45 cents. 

45 and less than 

50 cents. 

50 cents and over. 

Chipper: 

Eastern States.. 
Lake States.... 
Can a da. 

77 


2 

2 

4 

20 

49 









14 




13 

1 









22 


6 

16 














_ 











Total 

113 


8 

18 

17 

21 

49 







• 












Cook (digesters): 
Eastern States.. 
Lake States.... 
Canada 

62 



2 

4 

4 

2 

2 


11 

16 

6 

9 

6 


13 



2 


2 

3 

6 





11 





2 

2 

2 


2 




3 

















Total .. 

86 



4 

4 

8 

7 

10 


13 

16 

6 

9 

9 











Cook’s helper: 

Eastern States.. 
Lake States.... 
Canada. 

85 


9 

2 

3 

18 

28 

20 

5 







6 


3 

2 

1 








13 


6 

5 


1 




1 





















Total... 

104 


18 

9 

4 

19 

28 

20 

5 

1 















Acid maker: 

Eastern States.. 
Lake States 

67 


4 

7 

4 

3 

3 

1 

24 

12 

6 

3 




10 



2 


8 








Canada. 

8 




2 

2 

2 

2 























Total. 

85 


4 

9 

6 

13 

5 

3 

24 

12 

6 

3 
















Sulphur burner: 
Eastern States.. 

19 




3 

10 

6 









Lake States 

2 




2 










Canada. 

7 



7 




























Total. 

28 



7 

5 

10 

6 





















J 


Total in Eastern 
'States. 

310 


15 

13 

18 

55 

88 

23 

29 

23 

22 

9 

9 

6 


Total in Lake States. 

45 


3 

6 

16 

11 

3 

6 





Total in Canada.... 

61 


12 

28 

2 

5 

4 

4 


3 




3 













Grand total.. 

416 


30 

47 

36 

71 

95 

33 

29 

26 

22 

9 

9 

9 







It appears from the table that the general level of wages is con¬ 
siderably higher in the Eastern States than in the Lake States and 
somewhat higher in the Lake States than in Canada. The rate 
reported for the largest number of employees is 22 } cents and less 
than 25 cents in the Eastern States, 11 } and less than 20 cents in 
the Lake States, and 15 cents and less than 11 } cents in Canada. 

The table next presented shows the hourly wages paid in selected 
occupations in sulphite mills, by maximums, minimums, quartiles, 
and medians. 






























































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


119 


Table 78. — Rate of pay in selected occupations in sulphite mills ( maximum, minimum, 

upper and lower quartiles, and median). 1 


[The upper and lower quartiles have been entered only in cases in which information was reported for 

50 or more employees.] 



Male em¬ 
ployees 


Rate of pay per hour. 


Occupation and geographical division. 

for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Lower 

quartile. 

Median. 

Upper 

quartile. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Chipper: 

Eastern States. 

77 

$0.146 

$0. 200 

$0. 234 

$0. 235 

$0. 242 

Lake States. 

14 

.175 

( 2 ) 

.178 

( 2 ) 

.200 

Canada. 

22 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.168 

Total. 

113 

.125 

.175 

.200 

.234 

.242 

Cook (digester): 







Eastern States. 

62 

.167 

.310 

.330 

.375 

.459 

Lake States. 

13 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.230 

( 2 ) 

.250 

Canada. 

11 

.200 

( 2 ) 

.250 

( 2 ) 

.450 

Total. 

86 

.150 

.230 

.320 

.360 

.459 

Cook’s helper: 







Eastern States. 

85 

. 125 

. 220 

.242 

. 250 

.280 

Lake States. 

6 

. 125 

( 2 ) 

.148 

( 2 ) 

. 175 

Canada.,. 

13 

. 145 

( 2 ) 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.300 

Total. 

104 

.125 

.167 

.235 

.250 

.300 

Acid maker: 







Eastern States. 

67 

.145 

.208 

.280 

.310 

.389 

Lake States. 

10 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.200 

( 2 ) 

.210 

Canada. 

8 

.185 

( 2 ) 

.218 

( 2 ) 

.250 

Total. 

85 

.145 

.200 

.280 

.290 

.389 

Sulphur burner: 







Eastern States. 

19 

.188 

.220 

.220 

.234 

.242 

Lake States. 

2 

.175 

( 2 ) 

.183 

( 2 ) 

.190 

Canada. 

7 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.160 

( 2 ) 

.160 

Total. 

28 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.220 

( ? ) 

.242 


1 For explanation of the statistical terms, see Table 76. 

2 Not entered because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 


The median and maximum wages of chippers are higher in the 
Lake States than in Canada and much higher in the Eastern States 
than in the Lake States, while the minimum in this occupation is 
higher in the Lake States than in the Eastern States. The maximum 
hourly rate for chippers, 24.2 cents, is reported in the Eastern States 
and the minimum, 12.5 cents, in Canada. 'Among the digester cooks 
for whom information was secured the maximum and the median 
rates are highest in the Eastern States, second highest in Canada, and 
lowest in the Lake States. The minimum reported is higher in 
Canada than in either of the other geographical divisions. Half of 
the digester cooks in the Eastern States are paid 33 cents or over per 
hour, half of those in Canada 25 cents or over per hour, and half of 
those in the Lake States 23 cents or over per hour. It will be noted 
that the highest rate paid to digester cooks in the Eastern States, 
45.9 cents, is only very slightly higher than the maximum in Canada. 
The minimum, 15 cents, is reported for the Lake States. 

In the case of cook ; s helpers the maximum hourly rate is highest 
in Canada and considerably higher in the Eastern States than 
in the Lake States; the median rate is highest in the Eastern States 
and slightly higher in Canada than in the Lake States, and the 
minimum is higher in Canada than in the Eastern States or the Lake 




















































120 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


States. The maximum wage reported is 30 cents and the minimum 
is 12.5 cents. The maximum wage paid to acid makers is 38.9 cents 
and the minimum is 14.5 cents. Both of these figures are reported 
for mills in the Eastern States. It will be noted that both the 
maximum and minimum rates in this occupation are higher in 
Canada than in the Lake States and that the median rate is highest 
in the Eastern States and slightly higher in Canada than the Lake 
States. Among the sulphur burners the maximum, minimum, and 
median rates are highest in the Eastern States, second highest in the 
Lake States, and lowest in Canada. As the number of sulphur 
burners for whom data were secured is small, a further analysis of 
the data for this occupation would be of doubtful value. 

The table shows that wages in selected occupations in sulphite 
mills are in general highest in the Eastern States and somewhat 
higher in Canada than in the Lake States. 

OCCUPATIONS COMMON TO GROUND-WOOD AND SULPHITE MILLS. 

Data have been tabulated for 1,637 employees in selected occupa¬ 
tions common to ground-wood and sulphite mills. Of these employees 
537 are barker men, 320 are screenmen, 39 are decker men, 379 are 
wet-machine tenders, and 362 are pressmen. In the following table 
the employees for whom data have been secured are classified accord¬ 
ing to hours worked per day or per shift: 

Table 79 .—Hours worked per day or per shift in selected occupations common to ground- 

wood and sulphite mills. 

[The percentages have been computed only in cases where data are presented for 50 or more employees.] 


Male 


Geographical divisions and occupations. 

ees for 
whom in¬ 
formation 
was 

secured. 

3 shifts 
per day. 

2 shifts 
per day. 

By the 
day 9 
hours. 

By the 
day 10 
hours. 

Other¬ 
wise 
than as 
specified. 

Eastern States: 

Barkerman. 

296 

198 

30 

156 

259 

41.9 

82.8 

(9 

-61.5 

87.3 


51.0 

1.5 

6.8 

0.3 

4.0 

(9 

Screenman. 

11.6 

(9 

38.5 

7.7 

Deckerman. 


Wet-machine tender. 



Pressman. 

5.0 



Total. 



939 

67.8 

11.2 

17.8 

2.1 

1.1 

/ 

Lake States: 

Barkerman. 

81 

35 

4 

66 

1 




100.0 

(9 


Screenman. 


(9 

(9 

100.0 



Deckerman. 




Wet-machine tender. 





Pressman. 



(9 


Total. 





187 


55.6 


44.4 


Canada: 

Barkerman. 




160 

87 

5 

157 

102 


21.3 

78.1 

(9 

79.0 

98.0 


56.3 

22.5 

2.3 

Screenman. 

19.5 

(9 

21.0 

2.0 


Deckerman. 



Wet-machine tender. 




Pressman. 




Total. 




511 

10.8 

• 

64.2 


17.6 

7.4 

Total in Eastern States. 


939 

187 

511 

67.8 

11.2 

55.6 

64.2 

17.8 

2.1 

44.4 

17.6 

1.1 

Total in Lake States. 

Total in Canada. 

10.8 


7.4 

Grand total. 


1,637 

42.3 

32.8 

10.2 

11.8 

2.9 



Per cent of employees working— 


1 Not computed because of the small number of employees for whom information was secured. 


















































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


121 


Of the employees for whom data are presented in the above table, 
42.3 per cent work three shifts per day, 32.8 per cent work two shifts 
per day, 10.2 per cent work by the day 9 hours, and 11.8 per cent 
work by the day 10 hours. The proportion of employees working 
two shifts per day is highest in Canada, second highest in the Lake 
States, and lowest in the Eastern States, while the proportion of 
employees working by the day 10 hours is highest in the Lake States, 
second highest in Canada, and lowest in the Eastern States. None 
of the employees in the Lake States work three shifts per day, and 
none of the employees in the Lake States or in Canada work by the 
day 9 hours, while of the employees in the Eastern States for whom 
data are presented 67.8 per cent work three shifts per day and 17.8 
per cent work by the day 9 hours. 

In the following table employees in selected occupations common 
to ground-wood and sulphite mills are classified by geographical divi¬ 
sion and by range in hourly rates of pay: 



Table 80. —Rate of pay in selected occupations common to ground-wood and sulphite mills. 


122 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


■2 


* 


a' 

go 

£-2 
CO 5 
03 


C0 

■ggS 

CM 

CO 


CO 

1§§ 

03 rl C> 


CO 

CO 

|s.8 


03 

iS 


a 


CM 


CM 


CM 


O 

CO 


o 

CO 


a> 


CM 


CO 

CO 


co 


to 


*° & 




CO 




CM 


CO 

© CM • 

12 £ 

S 03 O 
03 rl O 

>is 


S' 


CM rH 


CO 


CO 


CO 


CM 00 


tO 


CM 


05 00 ^ 

CO H H 

CM 


O 

CO 



CM CO 
CO CO H 


cm 

CM 


§ 


CM 


CM 


O CM H 
CM 


co 

CM 


05 » 


to co co 
00 CO co 


s 


CO 

Jjl> . 

d S d 

tO+3 


O CM < 


CM 


CO CO CO 
HH CO 


CM 


CM 


CO t- tO 
CO KO 


to 

o 


co 


to 

t» 


O CM O 
t - '* CO CO 
CM 


CM 

S3 


8 


MS 


1-1 W 

Is 

8 


CO CM 05 
t-H CM CM 




to 05 00 

CM ^ to CM 


co 


^000 

^ l>- to 


CM 

CM 


C 0 , 

CO Hn 
a) CM . 

1st 

o 


CD 

«rl w 

3 a) 

M CD 

[Do 



CO 

a 

o 

• H 

CO 

•fH 

'O 

« 

3 

ft 

03 

feo 

8 

fcJD 

"d 

<3 

CO 

a 

.2 

+3 

03 

Q< 

d 

o 

o 

O 


CM 


CM 


CO 


CO 


CO 

CM 


to 


to 


00 »o 

05 CO 00 


O Tt< to 

CO 


CO CO 
to CO to 


05 

CO 


CO 


co 


Oil 

to 

CM 


« CM 

o 


to 

CO 


00 00 


CM 

CO 

co 


05 t"» 

CO 00 rH 
05 i-» to 


CO 

CO 



03 

o 

E-< 


§3 ©13 

0M^I § 

B a3 c3 


3 

o 

E* 



o3 25 


CQ 


c3 

o 

El 




g-S s 


m a 

C3 03 


lias 
2 
ft 


$ 

o 

E-» 


w 

03 


“3 

as* 

Sgfl 

HftO 

c3 o3 c3 

-M 4J 

o o o 


03 

+3 

o 


Sh 

o 




































































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


123 


The table shows that the proportion of employees who receive the 
higher rates specified is considerably larger in the Eastern States 
than in the Lake States and larger in the Lake States than in Canada. 

Additional basis for a comparison of wages in the United States 
with wages in Canada is afforded by the table next presented, in which 
the wage rates are shown by maximums, minimums, quartiles, and 
medians. 

Table 81 .—Rate of 'pay in selected occupations common to ground-wood and sulphite 
mills: ( Maximum , minimum, upper and lower quartiles, and median.) 1 


(The upper and lower quartiles have been entered only in cases in which information was reported for 50 

or more employees.] 


• 

Male em¬ 
ployees 

• 

Rate of pay per hour. 


Occupations and geographical divisions. 

for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Lower 

quartile. 

Median. 

Upper 

quartile. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Barkerman: 







Eastern States. 

296 

$0.150 

$0. 200 

$0.215 

$0.234 

$0.263 

Lake States. 

81 

.160 

.175 

.180 

.188 

.200 

Canada. 

160 

.104 

.150 

.150 

.150 

.210 

Total. 

537 

.104 

.167 

.200 

.215 

.263 

Screenman: 







Eastern States. 

198 

.125 

.200 

.230 

.230 

.242 

Lake States. 

35 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.135 

( 2 ) 

.160 

Canada. 

87 

.070 

.135 

.150 

.167 

.190 

Total. 

320 

.070 

.150 

.190 

.230 

.242 

Deckerman: 







Eastern States. 

30 

.183 

( 2 ) 

.230 

( 2 ) 

.234 

Lake States. 

4 

.125 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

.125 

Canada.. 

5 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.220 

( 2 ) 

.220 

Total. 

39 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.230 

( 2 ) 

.234 

Wet-machine tender: 







Eastern States. 

156 

.125 

.150 

.211 

.263 

.263 

Lake States. 

66 

.125 

.140 

.145 

.150 

.325 

Canada. 

157 

. 0S3 

.125 

.125 

.150 

.250 

Total. 

379 

.083 

.125 

.150 

.188 

.325 

Pressman: 







Eastern States. 

259 

.125 

.220 

.223 

.230 

.230 

Lake States. 

1 

.175 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

.175 

Canada. 

102 

.104 

. 125 

.167 

.167 

.200 

Total. 

362 

.104 

. 167 

.220 

.230 

.230 


1 For explanation of the statistical terms, see Table 75. 

2 Not entered because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 


Among the barker men for whom data are presented in the above 
table the lower quartile, median, and upper quartile are highest in 
the Eastern States, second highest in the Lake States, and lowest 
in Canada; the maximum is highest in the Eastern States and 
slightly higher in Canada than in the Lake States, and the minimum 
is highest in the Lake States and much higher in the Eastern States 
than in Canada. Half of the employees in the Eastern States are 
paid 21.5 cents or over per hour, half of those in the Lake States are 
paid 18 cents or over per hour, and half of those in Canada are paid 
15 cents or over per hour. The maximum wage and median wage 
of screenmen are highest in the Eastern States, second highest in 
Canada, and lowest in the Lake States, while the minimum is higher 
in the Eastern States and the Lake States than in Canada. The 


























































124 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


highest wage reported in this occupation is 24.2 cents and the lowest 7 
cents per hour. For deckermen the maximum and minimum are 
highest in the Eastern States, second highest in Canada, and lowest in 
the Lake States. Half of the deckermen in the Eastern States are 
paid 23 cents or over per hour and half of those in Canada 22 cents 
or over per hour. 

The maximum wage of wet-machine tenders, 32.5 cents, is reported 
in the Lake States and the minimum, 8.3 cents, in Canada. The 
lower quartile and median are highest in the Eastern States and lowest 
in Canada; the upper quartile is much higher in the Eastern States 
than in either the Lake States or Canada, and the maximum is 
higher in the Eastern States than in Canada. Among the pressmen 
the maximum wage per hour is highest in the Eastern States and 
lowest in Canada, while the minimum is highest in the Lake States 
and lowest in Canada. Half of the pressmen in the Eastern States 
are paid 22.3 cents or over per hour and half of those in Canada are 
paid 16.7 cents or over per hour. 

Because of the small number of employees for whom data were 
secured in several of the occupations in the Lake States and in Canada, 
it is difficult to make a general comparison between the localities. It is 
clear, however, that wages are in general considerably higher in the 
Eastern States than in either the Lake States or Canada. The figures 
also seem to indicate a slightly lower level of wages in Canada than 
in the Lake States. 

«. 

OCCUPATIONS IN NEWS-PRINT PAPER MILLS. 

The data have been tabulated for 2,698 employees in 10 selected 
occupations in news-print paper mills. In the table which follows 
the employees for whom information has been secured are classified 
by hours worked per day or per shift and by geographical divisions: 

Table 82 .—Hours worked per day or per shift in occupations in news-print paper mills . 


[The percentages have been computed only in cases where data are presented for 50 or more employees.] 


Geographical divisions and occupations. 

0 

Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Per cent of employees working— 

3 shifts 
per day. 

2 shifts 
per day. 

By the 
day 

9 hours. 

By the 
day 

10 hours. 

Other¬ 
wise than 
as speci¬ 
fied. 

Eastern States: 

Beaterman. 

475 

14 

331 

352 

296 

243 

87 

41 

213 

26 

92.0 

8.0 




Clay and size man. 

<9 

(9 


Machine tender. 

93.4 

92.6 

90.5 
98.4 

97.7 

0) 

2.3 

(9 

6.3 

7.4 

9.5 

1.6 
2.3 

(9 

0.3 

Back tender. 



Third hand. 




Fourth hand. 




Fifth hand. 




Broke hustler. 


(9 

15.0 

(9 


Finisher. 

82.2 

(9 

.5 

Cutter. 


Total. 



2,078 

82.2 

5.8 

9.7 

2.1 

.1 

Total Eastern States. 

2,078 

300 

320 

82.2 

5.8 

93.7 

42.8 

9.7 

2.1 

6.0 

10.3 

.1 

.3 

Total Lake States. 

Total Canada. 

46.9 


Grand total. 



2,698 

68.9 

20.0 

7.5 

3.5 

.1 

1 



1 Not computed because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 

























































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


125 


Of the employees in the Eastern States for whom data are presented, 
82.2 per cent work three shifts per day, 5.8 per cent work two shifts 
per day, 9.7 per cent work by the day 9 hours, and 2.1 per cent work 
by the day 10 hours. In the Lake States 93.7 per cent of the em¬ 
ployees work two shifts per day, 6 per cent work by the day 10 hours, 
and no employees work three shifts per day or by the day 9 hours, 
while in Canada 46.9 per cent of the employees work three shifts per 
day, 42.8 per cent work two shifts per day, 10.3 per cent work by 
the day 10 hours, and none work by the day 9 hours. This table 
shows that a very large proportion of all the employees in news-print 
paper mills are shift workers. The three-shift system is well estab¬ 
lished in the Eastern States. In the Lake States, on the other 
hand, none of the employees work three shifts, while in Canada the 
two-sliift workers and the three-shift workers are reported in about 
equal numbers. Nearly all of the day workers in the Eastern States 
work 9'hours a day, while all the day workers in the Lake States 
and in Canada work 10 hours per day. 

The following table shows wages in selected occupations in news¬ 
print paper mills. In this table employees are classified by geograph¬ 
ical division and by range in hourly rates of pay: 


Table 83. —Rate oj pay in selected occupations in news-print paper mills. 


126 PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 








































































































































rth ha 


PULP AND NEWS-PEINT PAPEB. 


127 
































































































































128 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


It appears from the above table that a considerably larger propor¬ 
tion of employees in the Eastern States than of the employees in the 
Lake States or in Canada are paid at the higher rates specified in the 
table. The rate received by the largest number of employees in 
eastern mills is 22-J cents and less than 25 cents. The proportion of 
employees receiving the higher rates specified is somewhat higher in 
Canadian mills than in the Lake States. 

In the following table the wages are shown by maximums, mim- 
mums, upper and lower quartiles, and medians: 

Table 84 .—Rate of pay in selected occupations in news-print paper mills {maximum, 
minimum, upper and lower quartiles, and median). 1 

[The upper and lower quartiles have been entered only in cases in which information was reported for 50 or 

more employees.] 



Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 


Rate of pay per hour. 


Occupations and geographical divisions. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Lower 

quartile. 

Median. 

Upper 

quartile. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Beaterman: 





80.230 

80.360 

Eastern States. 

475 

80.135 

80.188 

80.230 

Lake States. 

94 

.138 

.150 

.158 

.160 

.190 

Canada. 

71 

.125 

.138 

.143 

.175 

.208 

Total. 

640 

.125 

.167 

. 

.220 

.230 

.360 

Clay and size man: 





( 2 ) 

.263 

Eastern States. 

14 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.190 

Lake States. 

6 

.160 

( 2 ) 

.178 

( 2 ) 

.200 

Canada. 

1 

.166 

< 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

.166 

Total. 

21 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.190 

( 2 ) 

.263 

Machine tender: 

Eastern States. 

331 

.208 

.438 

.460 

.480 

.525 

Lake States. 

39 

.250 

( 2 ) 

.313 

( 2 ) 

.363 

Canada. 

49 

.200 

( 2 ) 

.469 

( 2 ) 

.500 

Total. 

419 

.200 

.415 

.450 

.480 

.525 

Back tender: 

Eastern States. 

352 

.146 

. 2S0 

.310 

.330 

.470 

Lake States. 

42 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.210 

( 2 ) 

.265 

Canada. 

46 

.140 

( 2 ) 

.313 

( 2 ) 

.375 

Total.. 

440 

.125 

.263 

.292 

.315 

. 470 - 

Third hand: 







Eastern States. 

296 

.125 

.230 

.240 

.240 

.270 

Lake States. 

42 

.092 

( 2 ) 

.152 

( 2 ) 

.216 

Canada. 

43 

.166 

( 2 ) 

.226 

( 2 ) 

.266 

Total. 

381 

.092 

.219 

.240 

.240 

.270 

Fourth hand: 







Eastern States. 

243 

.138 

.223 

.230 

.230 

.242 

Lake States. 

36 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.170 

Canada. 

43 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.183 

( 2 ) 

.200 

Total. 

322 

.125 

.188 

.230 

.230 

.242 

Fifth hand: 







Eastern States. 

87 

.125 

.220 

.223 

.235 

.235 

Lake States. 

2 

.125 

( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

(») 

.125 

Canada. 

15 

.125 

( 2 ) 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.188 

Total. 

104 

.125 

.220 

;-= 

.220 

.235 

.235 


1 For explanation of the statistical terms, see Table 75. 

* Not entered because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 















































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 129 


Table 84.— Rate of pay in selected occupations in news-print paper mills ( maximum , 
minimum , upper and lower quartiles, and median) —Continued. 



Male em¬ 
ployees 


Rate of pay per hour. 


Occupations and geographical divisions. 

for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Lower 

quartile. 

Median. 

Upper 

quartile. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

Broke hustler: 







Eastern States. 

41 

80.150 

0) 

80.190 

0) 

80. 235 

Lake States. 

19 

.138 

(4 

.150 

0) 

.170 

Canada. 

17 

.104 

6) 

.120 

6) 

.125 

Total. 

77 

.104 

80.138 

.160 

80.190 

.235 

Finisher: 







Eastern States. 

213 

.150 

.200 

.200 

.200 

.281 

Lake States. 

15 

.150 

(9 

.170 

(9 

.200 

Canada. 

27 

.150 

C 1 ) 

.175 

0) 

.183 

Total. 

255 

.150 

.183 

.200 

.200 

.281 

Cutter: 

Eastern States. 

26 

.175 

(9 

.200 

(9 

0) 

.294 

Lake States. 

5 

.175 

(9 

.200 

.250 

Canada. 

8 

.100 

0) 

.168 

(9 

.200 

Total. 

39 

.100 

0) 

.200 

0) 

.294 


1 Not entered because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 


It appears from the table that among beatermen the maximum 
wage, 36 cents, is paid in the Eastern States, and the minimum, 12.5 
cents, in Canada. The maximum and upper quartile are highest in 
the Eastern States, second highest in Canada, and lowest in the Lake 
States; the median and lower quartile are highest in the Eastern 
States, second highest in the Lake States, and lowest in Canada; and 
the minimum is highest in the Lake States, second highest in the 
Eastern States, and lowest in Canada. The maximum wage of clay 
and size men is highest in the Eastern States and lowest in Canada; 
the minimum is highest in Canada and lowest in the Eastern States 
and the median is higher in the Eastern States than in the Lake 
States. Half of the machine tenders in the Eastern States for whom 
information was secured are paid 46 cents or over per hour, half 
of those in the Lake States are paid 31.3 cents or over per hour and 
half of those in Canada are paid 46.9 cents or over per hour. The 
maximum wage of machine tenders is slightly higher in the Eastern 
States than in Canada and is lowest in the Lake States; the median 
is slightly higher in Canada than in the Eastern States and is lowest 
in the Lake States, and the minimum is higher in the Lake States 
than in either the Eastern States or in Canada. 

Among back tenders the maximum wage, 47 cents, is paid in the 
Eastern States and the minimum, 12.5 cents, in the Lake States. The 
median is highest in Canada, slightly lower in the Eastern States, and 
lowest in the Lake States, while the maximum and minimum are high¬ 
est in the Eastern States, second highest in Canada, and lowest in the 
Lake States. The maximum and median wages of third hands are 
highest in the Eastern States, second highest in Canada and lowest 
in the Lake States, while the minimum wage is highest in Canada, 


S. Doc. 31, 62-1-—9 








































130 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


second highest in the Eastern States, and lowest in the Lake 
States. Half of the third hands in the Eastern States are paid 
24 cents or over per hour; half of those in Canada are paid 22.6 
cents or over per hour, and half of those in the Lake States are paid 
15.2 cents or over per hour. 

In the case of the fourth hands for whom data were reported the 
maximum and median are highest in the Eastern States, second high¬ 
est in Canada, and lowest in the Lake States. The minimum, 12.5 
cents, is reported both in the Lake States and in Canada. Half of the 
fifth hands in the Eastern States are paid 22.3 cents or over per hour, 
and half of those in Canada are paid 15 cents or over per hour. The 
maximum for fifth hands is highest in the Eastern States, second 
highest in Canada, and lowest in the Lake States, while the minimum 
is the same in all three localities. In the case of broke hustlers the 
maximum, minimum, and median are highest in the Eastern States, 
second highest in the Lake States, and lowest in Canada. Half of 
the finishers in the Lake States are paid 20 cents or over per hour, 
half of those in Canada are paid 17.5 cents or over per hour, and 
half of those in the Lake States are paid 17 cents or over per hour. 
The maximum wage of finishers is highest in the Eastern States and 
higher in the Lake States than in Canada, while the same minimum 
is reported for all three localities. The maximum for cutters is high¬ 
est in the Eastern States, second highest in the Lake States, and 
lowest in Canada. Half of the cutters in the Eastern States and in 
the Lake States are paid at the rate of 20 'cents or over per hour, 
while half of those in the Lake States are paid at the rate of 16.8 
cents or over per hour. 

It is evident from the table that employees in selected occupations 
in news-print paper mills are much better paid in the Eastern States 
than in either the Lake States or Canada. The employees in Cana¬ 
dian mills appear to receive in general somewhat higher wmges than 
employees in mills in the Lake States, this being particularly true in 
the case of machine tenders and the other members of the machine 
crew. It will be noted that the occupations mentioned in the last 
sentence are those in which the higher rates of pay are reported. 

OCCUPATIONS COMMON TO PULP AND PAPER MILLS. 

Of the 3,393 employees in selected occupations common to pulp 
and paper mills for whom data have been tabulated, 144 are engineers, 
237 are oilers, 585 are firemen, and 2,427 are laborers. In the follow¬ 
ing table these employees are classified by geographical division and 
by hours worked per day or per shift. 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 131 


Table 85. —Hours worked per day or per shift in selected occupations common to pulp 

and paper mills. 

[The percentages have been computed only in cases where data are reported for 50 or more employees.] 


Geographical divisions and occupations. 


Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 


3 shifts 
per day. 


Eastern States: 
Engineer... 

Oiler. 

Fireman... 
Laborer.... 

Total 

Lake States: 
Engineer... 

Oiler. 

Fireman... 
Laborer.... 

Total.... 

Canada: 

Engineer.. 

Oiler.. 

Fireman... 
Laborer... 




119 

155 

415 

1,619 


80.7 

71.6 

88.7 
5.5 


2,308 


28.8 


16 

41 

62 

565 


25.8 


684 


2.3 


9 . 

41 . 

108 42.6 

243 .4 


Total. 

Total Eastern States 
Total Lake States... 
Total Canada. 

Grand total... 


401 


11.7 


2,308 

684 

401 


28.8 

2.3 

11.7 


3,393 


21.4 


Per cent of employees working— 


2 shifts 
per day. 


13.4 

7.1 

8.9 

5.9 


6.9 


G) 

G) 

74.2 

.2 


13.7 


G) 

G) 

52.8 

29.6 


39.9 


6.9 

13.7 

39.9 


12.2 


By the 
day 9 
hours. 


16.8 

.7 

56.1 


40.6 


By the 
day 10 
hours. 


40.6 


27.6 


2.5 

4.5 
.7 

31.9 


23.0 


G) 

G) 


99.8 


83.8 


G> 

G) 

4.6 

70.0 


48.1 


Otherwise 
than as 
specified. 


-- 


23.0 

83.8 

48.1 


38.2 


3.4 


1.0 

.6 


.7 


G) 


.1 


G) 


.2 


.7 

.1 

.2 


.6 


i Not computed because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 


Of the employees for whom data are presented in the above table, 
21.4 per cent work three shifts per day, 12.2 per cent work two shifts 
per day, 27.6 per cent work by the day 9 hours, 38.2 per cent work 
by the day 10 hours, and less than 1 per cent work otherwise than 
specified. The proportion of three-shift employees is largest in the 
Eastern States and much larger in Canada than in the Lake States; 
the proportion of two-shift employees is largest in Canada, second 
largest in the Lake States, and smallest in the Eastern States; and 
the proportion of employees working by the day 10 hours is 
largest in the Lake States, second largest in Canada, and smallest 
in the Eastern States. None of the employees in the Lake States or 
in Canada, as compared with 40.6 per cent of the employees in the 
Eastern States, work by the day 9 hours. It will be seen that the 
hours of labor are shortest in the Eastern States and in general some¬ 
what shorter in Canada than in the Lake States. 













































































132 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER, 


The following table shows the range in hourly rates of pay, by 
geographical division: 

Table 86. —Rate of pay in selected occupations common to pulp and paper mills. 


Employees paid per hour— 


Occupations and geo¬ 
graphical divisions. 

Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Under 10 cents. 

10 and less than 
12£ cents. 

12| and less than 

15 cents. 

15 and less than 

17J cents. 

17£ and less than 

20 cents. 

20 and less than 

22\ cents. 

22\ and less than 

25 cents. 

25 and less than 

27§ cents. 

21\ and less than 

30 cents. 

30 and less than 

32i cents. 

32£ and less than 

35 cents. 

35 and less than 

40 cents. 

40 cents and over. 

Engineer: 

Eastern States... 
Lake States. 

119 

16 

9 




4 

2 

5 

5 

4 

2 


3 

3 

1 

30 

2 

37 

21 

10 

9 





5 

1 


Canada. 



9 






Total. 










144 




11 

11 

6 

7 

32 

37 

21 

10 

9 


Oiler: 

Eastern States... 
Lake States. 





155 

41 

41 


2 

1 

5 

5 

5 

8 

5 

23 

16 

42 

9 

8 

52 

2 

1 

46 

1 

1 

3 





• 







Canada. 

1 

1 






Total. 






237 

1 

8 

18 

44 

59 

55 

48 

4 






Fireman: 

Eastern States... 
Lake States.... 






415 

62 

108 



13 

2 

34 

21 

31 

24 

8 

23 

2 

34 

6 

1 

13 

244 

82 











Canada. 


1 

21 

21 

4 





Total. 






585 


1 

49 

76 

33 

41 

34 

265 

86 





Laborers: 

Eastern States... 
Lake States. 






1,619 

565 

243 


2 

101 

4 

67 

599 

300 

150 

761 

159 

16 

137 

102 

2 

4 

14 

1 










Canada. 

1 

6 

1 







Total. 







2,427 

1 

8 

172 

1,049 

936 

241 

5 

14 

1 





Total Eastern States. 
Total Lake States.... 
Total Canada. 





2,308 

684 

401 


4 

1 

12 

119 

11 

109 

629 

356 

195 

816 

195 

28 

223 

115 

5 

66 

4 

24 

291 

2 

22 

120 

21 

10 

9 




2 

4 



• 


Grand total_ 





3,393 

2 

17 

239 

1,180 

1,039 

343 

94 

315 

124 

21 

10 

9 




It appears from the above table that the proportion of employees 
earning the higher rates specified is much larger in the Eastern States 
than in either the Lake States or Canada. While the difference 
between the Lake States and Canada in the proportion of the em¬ 
ployees earning the higher rates is not great, wages appear on the 
whole to be somewhat higher in the Lake States than in Canada. 

In the table which follows the wages of male employees in selected 
occupations common to pulp and paper mills are shown by maxi- 
mums, minimums, upper and lower quartiles, and medians. 




















































































































PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 133 


Table 87. — Rate of pay in selected occupat ions common to pulp and paper mills ( maxi¬ 
mumi, minimum , upper and lower quartiles, and median)} 

[The upper and lower quartiles have been entered only in cases in which information was reported for 
^ 50 or more employees.] 


Occupations and geographical divisions. 


Engineer: 

Eastern States, 
Lake States... 
Canada. 

Total. 

Oiler: 

Eastern States 
Lake States... 
Canada. 

Total. 

Fireman: 

Eastern States 
Lake States... 
Canada. 

Total. 

Laborer: 

Eastern States. 
Lake States... 
Canada. 

Total. 


Male em¬ 
ployees 
for whom 
informa¬ 
tion was 
secured. 

Rate of pay per hour. 

Mini¬ 

mum. 

Lower 

quartile. 

Median. 

Upper 

quartile. 

Maxi¬ 

mum. 

119 

16 

9 

$0.167 
.167 
.150 

$0.270 
( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

80.280 
.200 
.167 

80.300 
( 2 ) 

( 2 ) 

80.357 
.250 
.225 

144 

.150 

.250 

.280 

.300 

.357 

155 

.100 

.190 

.220 

.235 

.250 

41 

.113 

( 2 ) 

.160 

( 2 ) 

.225 

41 

.090 

( 2 ) 

.150 

( 2 ) 

.250 

237 

.090 

.160 

.190 

.220 

.250 

415 

.125 

.250 

.250 

.250 

.294 

62 

.143 

.150 

.170 

.180 

.200 

108 

.100 

.146 

.160 

.230 

.280 

585 

.100 

.183 

.250 

.250 

.294 

1,619 

.100 

.150 

.187 

.190 

.280 

565 

.125 

.170 

.170 

.175 

.220 

243 

.083 

.138 

.150 

.155 

.225 

2,427 

.083 

.150 

.170 

.190 

.280 


1 For explanation of the statistical terms, see Table 75. 

2 Not entered because of the small number of employees for whom information was reported. 


The above table shows that half of the engineers reported in 
the Eastern States are paid at a rate of 28 cents or over per 
hour, that half of those in the Lake States are paid at a rate of 20 
cents or over per hour, and that half of those in Canada are paid at 
a rate of 16.7 cents or over per hour. The maximum wage for all 
engineers, 35.7 cents, is reported in the Eastern States and the mini¬ 
mum, 15 cents, in Canada. The maximum is somewhat higher in 
the Lake States than in Canada, while the minimum is the same for 
the Lake States and the Eastern States. The median wage of oilers 
is highest in the Eastern States, second highest in the Lake States, 
and lowest in Canada; the maximum is lower in the Lake States 
than in the Eastern States or Canada; and the minimum is highest 
in the Lake States, second highest in the Eastern States, and lowest 
in Canada. In the case of firemen, the maximum and upper quartile 
are highest in the Eastern States, second highest in Canada, and 
lowest in the Lake States; the median and lower quartile are highest 
in the Eastern States, second highest in the Lake States, and lowest 
in Canada; and the minimum is highest in the Lake States, second 
highest in the Eastern States, and lowest in Canada. The maximum 
wage of laborers, 28 cents, is reported in the Eastern States and the 
minimum, 8.3 cents, in Canada. The upper quartile and median are 
highest in the Eastern States, second highest in the Lake States, and 
lowest in Canada; while the lower quartile and minimum are highest 





























































134 


PULP AND NEWS-PRINT PAPER. 


in the Lake States, second highest in the Eastern States, and lowest 
in Canada, 

It is evident from the figures presented in the tables that wages in 
occupations common to pulp and paper mills are much higher in the 
Eastern States than in the Lake States or in Canada. The medians 
show that the rates paid are in general somewhat lower in Canada 
than in the Lake States. In the case of laborers, who constitute two- 
thirds of the group, wages are decidedly lower in Canada than in the 
Lake States. 

SUMMARY. 

The data relative to labor conditions in the wood-pulp and news¬ 
print paper industry will be reviewed briefly in the following para¬ 
graphs. Original data have been secured by the Tariff Board for 
17,609 employees, of whom 69.2 per cent are in mills in the Eastern 
States, 13.6 per cent in mills in the Lake States, and 17.2 per cent in 
Canadian mills. Less than 2 per cent of all the employees for whom 
information has been secured are females. The data secured show 
that a large proportion of the workers in the industry are of foreign 
birth, and that of the foreign a large number are of the races of 
southern and eastern Europe. 

In the wood-pulp and news-print paper industry the length of the 
working day for men employed by the day is, in most cases, either 9 or 10 
hours. The shift workers who, in the mills for which schedules were 
secured, outnumber the day workers, are divided either into three 
shifts or into two shifts. In the Eastern States the three-shift 
system is in general use, and in Canada over two-fifths of the shift 
workers work three shifts per day. On the other hand, all of the 
shift employees in the Lake States for whom information was secured 
work two shifts per day. None of the day employees in Canada or in 
the Lake States work nine hours per day, as compared with over 
two-thirds of the day employees in eastern mills. It will be seen 
that the hours of labor are, upon the whole, longer in Canada than 
in the Eastern States, and longer in the Lake States than in Canada. 

The data presented show that hourly wages are higher in the case 
of employees working under the tliree-shift system than in the case 
of employees working under the two-sliift system, and higher in 
the case of employees working by the day 9 hours than in the case 
of employees working by the day 10 hours. 

The hourly wages paid are considerably higher in the Eastern 
States than in the Lake States or in Canada. This is true of each 
of the groups of occupations selected for tabulation and of all or 
nearly all of the occupations within the groups. 

The difference between wages in the Lake States and wages in 
Canada is small. In some occupations the Canadian mills, and in 
others the mills in the Lake States, pay the higher hourly rates. 
Wages are in general higher in Canada than in the Lake States in the 
skilled occupations of the industry. Digester cooks, machine tenders, 
and back tenders are paid higher hourly rates in Canada than in the 
Lake States. On the other hand, the wages of the men in occupations 
requiring little skill or training, as, for example, chippers, block 
handlers, barkermen, and common laborers, are considerably higher 
in the Lake States than in Canada. 


IT N ’If 


o 





















































